Bethlehem Construction, Inc. v. PGE

The parties enter into a continuing contract when “the various items listed in the notice of lien were contemplated by the parties to be considered as part of one continuous contract.” Spaeth v. Becktell, 150 Or 111, 120, 41 P2d 1064 (1935).

Petitioner appealed from a grant of summary judgment. Petitioner assigned error to the trial court’s determination that Respondent recorded a construction lien within the 75-day statutory period. On appeal, Petitioner argued that additional work completed in December did not renew the statutory period within which Respondent could record a lien for work completed in April. In response, Respondent argued that the 75-day period had not run, because Respondent never ceased providing work for Petitioner. The parties enter into a continuing contract when “the various items listed in the notice of lien were contemplated by the parties to be considered as part of one continuous contract.” Spaeth v. Becktell, 150 Or 111, 120, 41 P2d 1064 (1935). The Court held that the trial court properly concluded Respondent was within the statutory period to record a lien, because the original contract was altered by a change order, which the parties clearly contemplated to be part of the same contract. Affirmed.