Owners Sued Los Angeles Over Marilyn Monroe Home Status
The homeowners are challenging a historic landmark designation that blocks their plan to demolish the property.
Updated on Sept. 18, 2026 in Residential
Live Poll
Should local governments be allowed to designate private homes as historic landmarks against owners' wishes?
In 2024, the owners of the former Marilyn Monroe home in the Brentwood neighborhood of Los Angeles sued the city after it designated the residence a historic landmark. The suit challenges the city's authority to block the demolition of the 2,300-square-foot property.
Why it matters
The lawsuit centers on whether a historic designation effectively constitutes a taking of private property that requires government compensation. This legal fight highlights the tension between local preservation rules and the rights of property owners to redevelop their land.
The homeowners purchased the property for $8.35 million in 2023, though the home has seen 14 different owners since Marilyn Monroe lived there for six months in 1962. It remains unknown if the court will determine this designation requires financial compensation.
The players
Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank
The current owners of the property who filed the federal lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles.
Marilyn Monroe
The late actress who owned the Brentwood home for six months before her death in 1962.
City of Los Angeles
The local municipal authority that enforces land-use regulations and historic preservation designations.
The details
The city of Los Angeles used its historic preservation authority to grant the 2,300-square-foot house monument status, which prevents its destruction. The current owners are arguing in federal court that this action violates the Fifth Amendment by taking private property for public use without just compensation. This follows a previous unsuccessful attempt by the owners to overturn the landmark designation in California state court.
Timeline
Marilyn Monroe purchased the home in 1962.
The house became vacant in 2019.
Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank purchased the property in 2023.
The city designated the home a historic landmark in 2024.
Money Landscape
This case tests the application of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause to municipal preservation mandates. It highlights how local land-use policies can significantly alter the investment potential and development rights associated with private residential real estate.
This dispute illustrates how local historic designations can unexpectedly restrict a homeowner's ability to renovate, demolish, or rebuild their property. Residents considering purchasing older homes should discuss how historic preservation overlays might impact future property utility with a professional.
The takeaway
The outcome of this suit will clarify the financial liability cities face when imposing historic restrictions on private owners. Homeowners should review local landmark registries and zoning codes before finalizing any plans to significantly alter a property's original structure.
Further reading
For more on market dynamics and local housing rules, visit Residential.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Economic Times.
Live Poll
Should local governments be allowed to designate private homes as historic landmarks against owners' wishes?
