Jehnings v. Allison

*417GRABER, J.,

specially concurring.

Although the majority reaches the correct result, it does so on broader grounds than necessary. Accordingly, I concur in the majority’s result but not its analysis.

Both the majority and the dissent incorrectly conclude that ORS 671.625 is unambiguous. Subsection (3) provides only that “contracts” not in substantial compliance with the statute may not be enforced, while subsections (1) and (2) use the term “contracts and billings.” Absence of the word “billings” in subsection (3) might indicate that the legislature intended “billings,” but not unwritten…