Or. Rev. Stat. § 671.020

Prohibition on engaging in practice of architecture or use of title without valid certificate of registration; exceptions; stamp as indication of responsible control; rules

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

671.020 Prohibition on engaging in practice of architecture or use of title without valid certificate of registration; exceptions; stamp as indication of responsible control; rules. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, an individual or business entity that does not have a valid certificate of registration from the State Board of Architect Examiners may not:

(a) Engage in the practice of architecture within this state;

(b) Assume or use a title, form of address or other designation within this state that indicates or reasonably could be understood to indicate that the individual is an architect or that the individual or business entity engages in the practice of architecture; or

(c) State, declare, represent or otherwise purport in any title, sign, card, device, advertisement or other indication of the individual’s or the business entity’s business or occupation that the individual is an architect or that the individual or business entity engages in the practice of architecture within this state.

(2) An individual who does not have the certificate of registration under subsection (1) of this section may engage in the practice of architecture within this state and use a designation that indicates that the individual is an architect or engages in the practice of architecture if the individual:

(a) Is a foreign architect;

(b) Has a written agreement of affiliation with a registered architect or registered architectural firm under which the registered architect or registered architectural firm has responsible control over all aspects of the architectural services the individual provides; and

(c) Uses the designation “foreign architect, in consultation with” followed by the name of a registered architect and the registered architect’s registered architectural firm, if any, on all technical submissions, advertisements or other communications that purport to identify the foreign architect’s profession, occupation or business within this state.

(3) Upon receiving a certificate of registration from the board, a registered architect shall obtain a stamp that conforms with a design that the board specifies by rule. The stamp, when accompanied by the registered architect’s signature on any technical submission, constitutes the registered architect’s attestation that the registered architect has responsible control over the content of the technical submission. The registered architect is responsible for controlling the custody and use of the stamp.

(4) A registered architect may engage in the practice of architecture only under the registered architect’s own name, as that name appears on the certificate of registration, except that the registered architect may practice under the name or assumed business name of a registered architectural firm, as provided in ORS 671.041. [Amended by 1955 c.407 §1; 1957 c.408 §2; 1961 c.585 §4; 1971 c.587 §1; 1977 c.803 §2; 1979 c.354 §1; 2003 c.763 §2; 2013 c.196 §2; 2023 c.70 §2]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1976–2017 · leading case: Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners (2016) orctapp · cites it 19× “ORS 671.020, the statute proscribing the unlicensed practice of architecture and the use of the title “architect” or any representation indicating the practice of architecture, relates solely to the unlicensed practice of architecture in the State of Oregon.”

Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners (2017) or · cites it 28× “Thus, the question in this case reduces to whether the master plans that respondents prepared involved sufficient “planning” of the erection of “buildings” to constitute the practice of architecture as that term is used in ORS 671.020. ORS chapter 671 contains contextual clues…”

Merrill v. Board of Architect Examiners (1985) orctapp · cites it 2× “The Board’s notice charged petitioner with “practicing contrary to the provisions of ORS 671.020(1) and (2)” 2 by “[preparing the construction documents for a classroom addition to the Hamilton Creek School.”

Davis v. Board of Architect Examiners (2008) orctapp · cites it 5× “The violation of ORS 671.020, therefore, occurs at the time of planning or designing, if the plans or designs are executed for the purpose of erecting a building.”

Friedman v. Mt. Village, Inc. (1982) orctapp “ORS 671.020(1) prohibits the unlicensed practice of architecture: “In order to safeguard life, health and property and to eliminate unnecessary loss and waste in this state, no person shall practice the profession of architecture * * * without first qualifying before the board…”

Merrill v. Board of Architect Examiners (1985) or · cites it 2× “The State Board of Architect Examiners (BAE) fined petitioner $1,000 for unlicensed practice of architecture contrary to ORS 671.020. 1 The practice of architecture is defined to mean the “planning, designing or supervision of the erection, enlargement or alteration of any…”

Central Coast Construction v. Nels Laundry Service Corp. (1976) or “” ORS 671.020. This is done to insure that only those who are qualified and who are amenable to the disciplinary procedures of the State Board can practice architecture.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 671.020(1) — 5 cases

Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners (2016) orctapp “ORS 671.020, the statute proscribing the unlicensed practice of architecture and the use of the title “architect” or any representation indicating the practice of architecture, relates solely to the unlicensed practice of architecture in the State of Oregon.”

Twist Architecture & Design, Inc. v. Oregon Board of Architect Examiners (2017) or “Thus, the question in this case reduces to whether the master plans that respondents prepared involved sufficient “planning” of the erection of “buildings” to constitute the practice of architecture as that term is used in ORS 671.020. ORS chapter 671 contains contextual clues…”

Merrill v. Board of Architect Examiners (1985) orctapp “The Board’s notice charged petitioner with “practicing contrary to the provisions of ORS 671.020(1) and (2)” 2 by “[preparing the construction documents for a classroom addition to the Hamilton Creek School.”

Davis v. Board of Architect Examiners (2008) orctapp “The violation of ORS 671.020, therefore, occurs at the time of planning or designing, if the plans or designs are executed for the purpose of erecting a building.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 671.020(4) — 2 cases

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 671.020(l) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.