Lawsuits Against DRC's and/or HOA's

I actually have 2 questions -

1. Am unable to find the State website that will tell me the state guidlines/laws for HOA's. Can anyone point me to what part of the state govt has these laws? We are in Oklahoma.

2. We have a situation where a builder is placing a house "up the hill more" on a 1-acre lot that is a relatively steep hill with a solid rock core. Because of the rock core, it is too expensive to try to rip the core away to place the house further down the lot - so the builder is placing the house toward the top of the hill. This is the last open lot in this part of the nieghborhood. The nieghbors behind this lot want the DRC to deny his placement of the lot. The covenants mandate a 25-foot variance from the property line (which is actually the county's rule), with the exception of the front - which must be a 35-foot variance. Outside of types of building materials required, minimum square footage, there are no other covenants (or county laws that I can find) that mandate house placement on the lot. THe builder's house will be at least 70 feet from the back property line. Because it sits more on the top of the hill, the rear neighbors are fighting it saying he should pay more to try to get the rock out (estimates are $60K to $100K but no guarantees) and push it down the hill. They are threatening the HOA and DRC with lawsuits. A friend said they had no basis for a lawsuit against the HOA, as he is well within the covenants and county guidelines, and the HOA can only confirm his compliance, not introduce a hardship. The builder is also going to be the Owner (i.e., will live there). I am searching for the legal basis to put this to rest. Any help?

Thanks to any who take the time to reply.

DTP

They claim the board has the power to tell the builder to move his house to a different location on the lot. They haven't filed a suit yet - only threatened; so I have no idea what their basis will be. That is why I'm trying to find if if there is even anything they can do. There will be a board meeting this week where they can present their case (although they wanted us to meet "in their back yard" and we said "no"). We have already met and discussed the issue as a board, had the developer look at it, and a couple of other builders - all said there was nothing wrong with the home placement. Even the neighbors on either side of the lot were consulted and they were fine. Yes - it seems to be quite apparrent they don't want the house there.

I agree with Gloria. This is a county issue not a HOA. Everyone threatens "lawsuit" at the drop of a hat, especially in a HOA. I used to get "threatened" atleast 1 - 2 times a month when I was president. How many times did we get sued? NONE!
It is a well-known fact that a HOA member suing their HOA is suing themselves and their neighbors. A fact you may want to gently convey. Plus, it sounds like your HOA is still under the builder's control and not officially the homeowner's. The builder should be the one dealing with the situation.
I don't see a basis for this lawsuit. If one is brought, it most likely would be tossed out on merit alone. The HOA would have to pay money to pay a lawyer to defend itself in court if a suit is ever filed. However, I would wait until action is taken on the other side before taking such a drastic step. Always wait for the other side to act upon their threat. It's much cheaper to defend yourself than to attack someone else. Plus you have the option of counter-suing if need be which is much cheaper to do.

Try this for Oklahoma: http://homeownersassociations.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/oklahoma-law-for-homeowners-associations/

David,

Every once in a while someone here in Arizona files suit against the neighbor who built a new home that blocked the first owner's view of the mountains. These lawsuits are never successful because there is no right to a view across someone else's property.

Ask the complaining neighbor for his legal authority to prevent the construction of the house on the hill. If he cannot cite either a statute or a case, he has no chance of prevailing in court.