• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Taking without compensation - Marilyn Monroe

TerryRohrer

Elite Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Montana
A California couple is suing Los Angeles after the city blocked them from tearing down their property — Marilyn Monroe’s former home — and declared it a historic monument.

In their federal lawsuit, Brinah Milstein et al. v. City of Los Angeles, homeowners Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank say they bought the Brentwood property for $8 million in 2023 with plans to demolish its deteriorating structures and redevelop the site.

Monroe owned the 2,300-square-foot Spanish bungalow for about six months before her death.

The complaint says the property has been heavily altered over decades by 14 previous owners and is in declining condition.


The owners say Los Angeles issued demolition and grading permits on Sept. 7, 2023, The Post exclusively reported at the time.

A day later, the City Council moved to begin the process of declaring the property a historic-cultural monument after fans of Monroe and historians pressured the city to stop the demolition.

Aerial view of Marilyn Monroe's former home in Brentwood, Los Angeles.4
An aerial view of Marilyn Monroe’s former home in Brentwood, Los Angeles.
Councilmember Traci Park, whose district includes the property, pushed to protect the home, and the City Council ultimately voted in June 2024 to designate the site a “historic-cultural monument.”

The owners say that move killed their demolition plans and turned a private home into what amounts to a public monument without compensation.

“They couldn’t demolish, couldn’t repair, couldn’t build and couldn’t sell to someone who could. The city had effectively turned their private property into a public monument without paying for it,” Pacific Legal Foundation said in a press release Friday announcing it had joined the homeowners’ legal fight.

Monroe lived at the Brentwood home for six months until her death in 1962.AP
The couple said they purchased the property for over $8 million and have since absorbed approximately $30,000 in permits, hundreds of thousands of dollars for added security and millions in attorneys’ fees.

Their lawsuit also claims they pay over $100,000 annually in property taxes, insurance and utilities to hold the property, which remains unusable as they intended.

They say the city’s designation has created a tourist trap and security risk with multiple break-ins.

Aerial view of Marilyn Monroe's former home in Los Angeles, showing its red-tiled roof, green lawn, surrounding trees, and nearby properties.4
Current homeowners Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank bought the house for $8 million in 2023 but say it’s now worthless.Rafael Fontoura for CA Post
The complaint also alleges the walled-off property isn’t viewable from the street, so designating the property a landmark “lacked a public purpose.”

“The City took no action regarding the house’s now-alleged ‘historic’ or ‘cultural’ status, essentially admitting it was neither and that no public good would be served by so designating the house or the Property,” the complaint states.

According to Pacific Legal Foundation, the couple offered to pay to relocate the home so it could be turned into a public museum, but the city refused.


Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is a named defendant in the federal court case over the property.
The complaint says the cultural-historic designation, along with its unrentable condition, leaves the house’s market value “zero or a negative amount.”

The lawsuit, which names Mayor Karen Bass and the City of Los Angeles as defendants, argues the city’s preservation decision amounts to an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment.

“These homeowners have a straightforward request: either let them use their own property or compensate them fairly for turning it into a public monument,” said Pacific Legal Foundation attorney J. David Breemer.

“The Fifth Amendment doesn’t have caveats. If the City of Los Angeles wants a museum, it must pay for one — not force private homeowners to bear the cost and liability.”

Los Angeles filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing the owners knew before buying the home that it had Marilyn Monroe ties, attracted tourists and could someday be landmarked.

They also argue the owners have not shown a valid constitutional taking claim yet and have not exhausted all available city processes for altering the property.

The owners previously challenged the designation in state court and lost at the trial court level before filing the federal takings case.

Mayor Karen Bass’ office and the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office did not immediately return Fox News Digital’s request for comment.
 
I wonder why you'd not want to restore the house to its original "Monroe" configuration and thus kept both the history and the value both.
 
I wonder why you'd not want to restore the house to its original "Monroe" configuration and thus kept both the history and the value both.
"The complaint says the property has been heavily altered over decades by 14 previous owners and is in declining condition." The previous owners kept getting the seven-year itch to remodel.
 
AI: "Inverse condemnation lets property owners sue the government when it takes or damages their property without starting formal eminent domain proceedings or paying compensation, as required by the Fifth Amendment.

Primary Remedy
The main relief is just compensation, typically the fair market value of the taken property or the damage caused, awarded as monetary damages. Courts calculate this based on evidence like appraisals, often leading to multimillion-dollar settlements in complex cases.

Injunctive Relief
Owners can seek court orders to stop ongoing government actions, such as halting construction or enforcement that would cause further uncompensated harm when no payment is offered. This is less common than damages but available if irreparable injury is shown.

Declaratory Relief
Courts may declare a regulation invalid as applied to the owner’s property, either through administrative mandamus (narrowly overturning a specific denial) or broader rulings striking unconstitutional rules. This pairs with compensation claims when development permits are wrongfully blocked.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
In many states, prevailing owners recover reasonable attorney fees, expert costs, and litigation expenses tied specifically to the inverse condemnation claim, often as a percentage of the award under contingency arrangements. Fees aren’t available for unrelated tort claims in the same suit.

......................
Good luck to them.
 
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top