Here is my information. I am going to ask the Project Sentinel to get a copy of all evidence David Avny gave to the court regard the cases of:

Case Number 16CV291570 Issachar Ohana et al vs Alain Pinel Realtors, INC et al. This was a case where David claimed that the building was Breach of Contract

And Case Number 2015-1-CV-288597 I Ohana vs E. Kalvig it is listed as Other Real Property Unlimited

Here is some of the record (https://drive.google.com/file/d/17eUzHhdvymTrW9Ar0y9wZSa1S5sVJHQA/view?usp=sharing)

I strongly suspect that evidence presented BY the Plaintiff documents problems with the property, and since it was made in a public civil action, there is NO protection for gathering whatever information that ADOI (AvnyDavidOhanaIssachar) LLC has some knowledge of problems with the building. Even though they defended the property as being sound, they obviously made arguments in court that questions that.

Why would they attempt 2 lawsuits to try to cancel the sale or civil remedy against the sale of the property?

Here is the pages from the cases I discovered.

In 2015 David DISCOVERED that the building was in nonconformance of the zoning laws.
That renders all rental agreements illegal please read from here (https://www.jamescolincampbell.com/non-conforming-unit/#:~:text=Non%2DConforming%20is%20a%20very,the%20property's%20Certificate%20of%20Occupancy”

“Investors often ask me, what is a non-conforming unit? Non-Conforming is a very nice way of saying that the rental unit is illegal and that the number of actual rental units for the apartment building is more than the number of permitted units according to the property’s Certificate of Occupancy.”

The legal documents sent by David Avny clearly states:

Non-disclosure of Non-Conforming Use

10. One of the material facts about the Property that should have been disclosed to plaintiffs, but which was not disclosed to plaintiffs (either by the sellers or by Alain Pinel), is that the 11 unit apartment building is a nonconforming use under the zoning laws of the City of Mountain View. Under that zoning law, if fifty percent (50%) or more of the apartment building is substantially destroyed or removed, then the owner of the Property will not be able to reconstruct an 11 unit apartment building. Instead, the owner would be allowed to build only two residences on the Property, having a commercial value substantially less than an 11 unit apartment building.
Also:

“30. Alain Pinel’s (and its agents) wrongful conduct, as above described, included without limitation:

A. Selling the Property without disclosing the non-conforming use and without providing plaintiffs with any reasonable opportunity to discover that non-conforming use;
Also:

On October 29, 2015 Plaintiffs learned that the 11 unit apartment building on the Real Property is a non-conforming use under the City of Mountain View zoning laws, with the result that if fifty percent or more of the apartment building is destroyed, the apartment building cannot be rebuilt; instead, only two residential units would be allowed to be built, which would be a significant decrease in the value of the Real Property.

This was prepared by David Avny’s attorney

SHEA & MCINTYRE, A P.C.
2166 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
[408] 298-6611 Telephone
[408] 275-0814 Facsimile

With all the declarations of being in compliance with the CSFRA, no one bothered to see that the building itself is in nonconformance, which would by default render any rent collected as unlawful
The City is in more serious trouble because they have been enabling illegal rent collection.
David had PRIOR knowledge that the apartment was not legal, that is for sure under the court records, the previous one was likely never notified by the City of the problem.

And ADOI cannot claim any protected data here, because they voluntarily provided it during a fully public legal process, they cannot even ask for the case to be sealed, since they lost the case.

I feel really bad because I know about these cases before. Along with the IRS case in 2014 Docket No. 16014-11 and 25896-11, here (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O25XgZZVCgb3hjGJvG1fa-SsTHUJAjTz/view?usp=sharing) that case is also recorded and I provided a copy of it to you. Again PUBLIC RECORD.

I am simply pointing out that there is serious doubt as to the credibility of ADOI in this matter. And that it now appears this apartment is illegal as a whole.