Milstein and Bank sue Los Angeles over historic designation
Updated
Updated · Reason · May 7
Milstein and Bank sue Los Angeles over historic designation
5 articles · Updated · Reason · May 7
The January 2026 federal case centres on a Los Angeles house once owned by Marilyn Monroe for 157 days, after the city revoked redevelopment permits in 2023.
The owners say the monument designation destroyed all viable economic use, blocked repairs without approval, and triggered trespassing, drone flights and burglaries at the gated property.
Pacific Legal Foundation joined the suit in April, arguing the restrictions amount to an uncompensated Fifth Amendment taking and highlighting wider tensions between preservation rules, development and housing supply.
Can Los Angeles balance saving historic landmarks with private property rights and its housing crisis?
A judge ruled their land isn't worthless. How can homeowners prove a historic designation financially 'takes' their property?
When a celebrity home becomes a landmark, who pays the price for preserving a public memory?
Legal Showdown Over Marilyn Monroe’s $8.4M Brentwood Home: Historic Landmark Status vs. Property Rights
Overview
Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank bought the Marilyn Monroe home in 2023 and soon got city approval to demolish it and build a new house. However, in 2024, the City of Los Angeles declared the property a cultural-historical monument, which stopped their plans and took away much of the home's economic value. The new designation also restricted repairs and changes without city approval. In response, Milstein and Bank filed a federal lawsuit in 2026, claiming their property rights were violated, but a judge dismissed their case. The legal fight highlights the clash between private property rights and historic preservation.