The owners of a Los Angeles home once owned by Marilyn Monroe have filed a federal lawsuit against the city, arguing officials unlawfully blocked their plans to demolish the property by belatedly designating it a historic-cultural monument. In their complaint, Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank say the city waited more than six decades—despite long knowing of the home’s brief connection to Monroe—before acting, only after they secured permits in 2023 to tear the house down.
The property sits at the end of a quiet cul-de-sac in the Brentwood neighborhood, and the owners contend Monroe owned it for just six months in 1962, using it temporarily while working in Southern California. They argue her primary residence was in New York and that the 2,300-square-foot Spanish-style bungalow, which is not visible from the street, lacks meaningful historical significance. According to the lawsuit, the house no longer contains any trace of Monroe’s presence, noting that even at the time of her death, the home appeared sparsely furnished and makeshift, as described by a reporter who interviewed her there.
The owners say the property has passed through at least 14 owners since Monroe’s death and has been substantially altered, including major additions and new outbuildings, stripping it of any authentic historic character. They claim they paid more than $8 million for the property with the intention of redeveloping it, but city leaders, preservation advocates, and tour operators pushed through the landmark designation, effectively halting demolition unless the owners endure a lengthy and expensive legal process.
As a result, they argue, the designation has created ongoing problems for them and their neighbors, including tour buses crowding narrow streets, increased traffic, and trespassers attempting to peer over walls to see the house. The lawsuit accuses the city of violating the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause by depriving them of the ability to sell, redevelop, or otherwise make use of a deteriorating property without compensation, while providing no genuine public benefit. The owners are asking the court to declare that their constitutional rights were violated and to allow the demolition to proceed.