A legal battle is brewing in Los Angeles over the former home of Hollywood icon Marilyn Monroe. Current owners Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank have filed a lawsuit against the city over its attempt to designate the Brentwood property as a historic-cultural landmark. If granted, this status would prevent the home from being demolished or significantly altered. In this article we talk about Marilyn Monroe Home Owners Take Legal Action Against Los Angeles-.
The homeowners argue that the residence no longer retains enough original historic fabric to justify landmark designation. But Los Angeles officials and preservationists contend that Monroe’s short residency alone makes the site worthy of protection. As the dispute plays out in court, it highlights larger questions around commemorating the famous and safeguarding architectural heritage.
House Originally Built in 1929
The single-story ranch-style home was constructed in 1929, decades before Monroe took ownership. It sits on a quiet, tree-lined street in Brentwood, a posh neighborhood on L.A.’s Westside. Monroe purchased the 2,500 square-foot property in early 1962 for around $75,000. Just six months later, she was found dead at the age of 36 in the home’s master bedroom.
Over the next 60 years, the house traded hands multiple times and underwent significant renovations. Developer and reality TV producer Roy Bank and Brinah Milstein, an heiress to a real estate fortune, bought the property in 2022 for $8.35 million. They soon filed for demolition permits, hoping to replace it with a modern mansion.
Battle Over Historic Value
This alarmed Los Angeles officials and preservation groups, who felt Monroe’s link to the house made it worthy of protection. Despite the objections of the owners, the city council voted to consider historic-cultural monument (HCM) status for the home. If approved this summer, it would become much harder for Bank and Milstein to tear down or significantly alter the existing structure.
The homeowners preemptively filed suit against L.A. in January 2023, arguing that previous remodels have erased most traces of Monroe. Alterations include a new roof, windows, flooring, plumbing and landscaping. They also note that over a dozen people lived in the house after Monroe’s death.
In their legal filings, Bank and Milstein accuse L.A. officials of trying to exploit Monroe’s fame by “capitalizing on her tragic death.” They also warn that granting HCM status could lower surrounding property values by limiting redevelopment options.
City Says Monroe’s Legacy Still Matters
Los Angeles leaders maintain that Monroe left an enduring mark on the city during her brief stay in the home. Councilwoman Traci Park stated, “For people all over the world, Marilyn Monroe was more than just a movie icon. Her story…is a shining example of what it means to overcome adversity.”
Park and other backers of HCM designation argue that exact architectural details matter less than Monroe’s cultural significance. Even if the building has changed, they say its association with such an influential historical figure makes protecting its basic form and location reasonable.
Broader Debate on Commemoration
The dispute taps into larger ongoing debates about how societies remember, celebrate and memorialize noteworthy figures. What duty, if any, do current property owners have to maintain sites linked to famous former residents? Should a building’s physical state or integrity take precedence over intangible historical associations?
The answers depend greatly on one’s perspective. For critics of excessive landmarking, Monroe’s short residency doesn’t justify limiting private property rights in perpetuity. But for many Angelenos, protecting this modest suburban home would help preserve the story of a global icon who still looms large over the city.
How the saga plays out in court this summer could set an important precedent. If the home attains HCM status over its owners’ objections, that would signal a expansive view of historical value. The decision could encourage more landmarking battles between cities seeking to save emblematic structures and property owners arguing they should retain development rights.
For now, Marilyn Monroe’s final Los Angeles home remains standing while its fate hangs in limbo. But the legal fight around it shows conflicts between heritage preservation and private interests are still very much alive in Hollywood. I sincerely hope you find this “Marilyn Monroe Home Owners Take Legal Action Against Los Angeles- What’s the Story?” article helpful.
Ruby Arora is the lead writer at LosAngelesDailyNews.net, where she brings her extensive expertise in journalism and communications to cover Los Angeles’ vibrant culture and breaking news. Ruby holds a Master’s degree in Journalism and has a track record of delivering insightful and accurate stories. Connect with her on Instagram and YouTube for more updates and behind-the-scenes content.
