N※N

Marilyn Monroe Estate Owners Sue Los Angeles

  //house-home.news-articles.net/content/2026/02/0 .. arilyn-monroe-estate-owners-sue-los-angeles.html
  Published in House and Home on Friday, February 6th 2026 at 15:15 GMT by Orange County Register
      Locales: California, UNITED STATES

Brentwood, CA - February 6th, 2026 - The property where Marilyn Monroe tragically passed away in 1962 is once again the focus of public attention, but this time it's not due to the enduring allure of the Hollywood icon. The current owners, Doug Droute and GreenDem, have filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, challenging the city's recent designation of the Brentwood estate as a historic landmark. The legal action alleges the city acted improperly, violating the owners' property rights and hindering their planned redevelopment of the site.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, centers around the property located at 12405 Doheny Drive. Droute and GreenDem purchased the estate in 2023 with the intention of constructing a new residence. They claim the city's December designation as a historic landmark has effectively stalled those plans, imposing significant restrictions on what they can do with their property.

Historic landmark status in Los Angeles comes with a stringent set of regulations. Any significant alterations, renovations, or even demolitions require approval from the city's Historic Preservation Office. This process can be lengthy, expensive, and often results in limitations on the owner's design choices. While intended to preserve cultural heritage, critics argue that such designations can unduly burden property owners and stifle development.

According to the lawsuit, the city's decision was "arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful." The owners contend that the city failed to adhere to proper procedures, including providing adequate notification and a meaningful opportunity for them to present their case before the landmark designation was approved. They claim the city did not adequately justify the designation based on historical or architectural significance, arguing that the property's notoriety stems solely from Monroe's death, rather than any inherent value of the structure itself.

The case highlights a growing tension between preservation efforts and property rights, a common battleground in rapidly developing cities like Los Angeles. Advocates for historical preservation argue that protecting landmarks is vital for maintaining a city's character and providing a tangible link to its past. They would point to the countless other landmark disputes across the city, some regarding even less famous properties, and state that Monroe's connection to the house elevates it beyond simple real estate.

However, property owners often counter that strict preservation rules can diminish the value of their investments and restrict their ability to utilize their land as they see fit. In this instance, Droute and GreenDem are seeking to overturn the landmark designation entirely and are also demanding compensation for damages incurred as a result of the city's actions. The financial implications could be considerable, given the potential cost of redesigning their plans to comply with historic preservation guidelines.

Legal experts suggest the outcome of this case could set a precedent for future landmark designations in Los Angeles. If the court rules in favor of Droute and GreenDem, it could force the city to re-evaluate its procedures and provide greater due process for property owners affected by landmark designations. Conversely, a ruling upholding the city's decision would strengthen the power of the Historic Preservation Office and likely lead to more aggressive preservation efforts.

The property itself is a relatively modest one-story ranch house, not known for its architectural brilliance. This fact is central to the owners' argument; they suggest the city is leveraging Monroe's fame to justify restrictions on a property that lacks inherent architectural or historical merit. The controversy also reignites discussions about the ethical considerations of capitalizing on tragedy and the extent to which a person's personal history should dictate the fate of a private property.

As of today, a spokesperson for Mayor Bass's office has not issued a comment on the pending litigation. The case is expected to draw significant media coverage and public debate, given the enduring fascination with Marilyn Monroe and the sensitive issues surrounding property rights and historical preservation. Court observers anticipate a potentially lengthy legal battle, with both sides likely to vigorously defend their positions.