L.A. stopped a couple from demolishing Marilyn | Real Estate news

A Brentwood couple is suing town of Los Angeles and Mayor Bass, claiming their constitutional rights had been violated when metropolis officers blocked them from demolishing the home where Marilyn Monroe died in 1962.

In a 37-page grievance that accuses town of collusion and bias, the lawsuit filed by owners Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank claims L.A. “deprived Plaintiffs of their intended demolition of the house and the use and enjoyment of their Property without any actual benefit to the public.”

It’s yet another chapter in a saga surrounding the destiny of the well-known property, which kicked off in 2023 when Milstein, a rich real estate heiress, and Bank, a actuality TV producer with credit including “The Apprentice” and “Survivor,” purchased the home for $8.35 million. They own the property next door and hoped to tear down Monroe’s place to develop their property.

The pair shortly obtained demolition permits from the Department of Building and Safety, but once their plans grew to become public, an outcry erupted. A legion of historians, Angelenos and Monroe followers claimed the Nineteen Twenties hang-out, where the actor died in 1962, is an indelible piece of town’s historical past.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents L.A.’s eleventh council district where the home is positioned, said she acquired a whole bunch of calls and emails urging her to shield it. In September 2023, she held a press convention dressed as Monroe — vibrant pink lipstick, bobbing blond hair — urging the City Council to declare it a landmark.

The Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Commission began the landmark software course of in January 2024, barring the homeowners from destroying the home in the meantime. L.A. City Council unanimously voted to designate it as a historic cultural monument a few months later, formally saving it from destruction.

It’s not the first legal problem introduced by Milstein and Bank. The pair sued town in 2024, accusing town of “backdoor machinations” in preserving a home that doesn’t deserve to be a historic cultural monument.

An L.A. Superior Court Judge threw out the swimsuit in September 2025, calling it “an ill-disguised motion to win so they can demolish the home.”

The latest lawsuit consists of a selection of damages, claiming the property’s monument standing has turned it into a vacationer attraction, bringing trespassers that leap over the partitions surrounding the property. In November, burglars broke into the home looking for memorabilia, the swimsuit alleges.

The lawsuit accuses town of taking no efforts to stop trespassers and failing to compensate them for their loss of use and enjoyment of the property. It also notes that the owners provided to pay to relocate the home, but town ignored them.

The feud has stirred up a bigger dialog on what precisely is value defending in Southern California, a area loaded with architectural marvels and Old Hollywood haunts swirling with superstar legend and gossip.

Fans declare the home, positioned on fifth Helena Drive, is just too iconic to be torn down. Monroe purchased it for $75,000 in 1962 and died there six months later, the only home she ever owned by herself. The phrase “Cursum Perficio” — Latin for “The journey ends here” — was adorned in tile on the entrance porch, including to the property’s lore.

Milstein and Bank declare it has been transformed so many occasions over the years, with 14 different homeowners and over a dozen renovation permits issued over the last 60 years, that it bears no resemblance to its former self. Some Brentwood locals think about it a nuisance, since followers and tour buses flock to the handle for footage, even though the only factor seen from the road is the privateness wall.

“There is not a single piece of the house that includes any physical evidence that Ms. Monroe ever spent a day at the house, not a piece of furniture, not a paint chip, not a carpet, nothing,” their earlier lawsuit claimed.

With their latest lawsuit, Milstein and Bank are looking for a court order permitting them to demolish the home and compensation for the decline in property worth following town’s resolution to declare it a monument.