Couple Sues Los Angeles Over Historic Designation of Marilyn Monroe’s Home

A couple in California has launched a lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, claiming it blocked them from demolishing their property—Marilyn Monroe’s former residence—by designating it a historical monument.

In the federal case, titled Brina Milstein et al. v. City of Los Angeles, homeowners Brina Milstein and Roy Bank argue they bought the Brentwood property for $8 million in 2023, intending to tear down the rundown building and redevelop the site. Monroe had owned this 2,300-square-foot Spanish bungalow for about six months before her passing.

The complaint notes that the house has undergone extensive modifications by 14 previous owners and is in poor condition.

The city had issued a demolition permit on September 7, 2023. However, the following day, after the intervention of Monroe enthusiasts and historians urging the city to halt the demolition, the City Council began moves to designate the property as a historical and cultural monument.

City Council member Tracy Park advocated for the site’s protection. Ultimately, in June 2024, the council voted to officially designate it as a “Historic and Cultural Monument.” According to the homeowners, this action directly contradicts their plans to demolish the building and effectively transforms the house into a public monument without compensation.

They stated, “They couldn’t demolish it, repair it, or even sell it.” Essentially, they feel the city has converted their private property into a public monument without any payment for it. The Pacific Law Foundation has joined their legal fight.

The couple claims they’ve incurred about $30,000 in permit fees, along with hundreds of thousands for security, and millions in legal costs. They also mention that they are paying over $100,000 annually in property taxes, insurance, and utilities for a property that remains unusable.

They assert that the city’s designation has turned the site into a tourist trap while creating security concerns due to break-ins.

The couple argues that designating the property as a landmark is unjustifiable, especially since it isn’t visible from the street. They also point out that the city has not taken any steps to affirm the alleged historic or cultural significance of the home, seemingly acknowledging it serves no public interest.

The couple did propose relocating the house to create a public museum, but the city declined the offer, according to the Pacific Law Foundation. They argue that the historic designation means the property now has “zero or negative market values.”

The lawsuit names Mayor Karen Bass and the City of Los Angeles, claiming the city’s continued actions represent an unconstitutional judgment under the Fifth Amendment. Attorney J. David Breemer stated, “If the city of Los Angeles wants a museum, it has to pay for it and not shift the burden onto private homeowners.”

Los Angeles has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, countering that the owners were aware of the property’s connection to Marilyn Monroe prior to their purchase and that they have not exhausted all city processes regarding alterations to the property.

The couple previously contested the designation in state court but were unsuccessful before escalating the issue to federal court.

As of now, there’s been no response from Mayor Bass’s office or the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office regarding the lawsuit.