In 2009, Matthew and Chris Lande entered into a contract with Gregg Flynn, the owner of Flynn Builders, to construct a new home for

\($259,576.\) Flynn began construction, which continued until July 2009 when the Landes discovered a \($20,000\) materials markup that Flynn did not disclose. The Lande’s lender and the Landes refused to pay the markup. Because the Landes and their lender refused to continue making payments, Flynn stopped construction and filed a mechanic’s lien for \($28,307.50.\) In August 2009, Flynn filed a petition to enforce the mechanic’s lien. The matter proceeded to trial in May 2010, at which time the district court found Flynn had substantially performed the contract and was entitled to a judgment against the Landes. The court concluded Flynn had substantially performed as the home was framed, enclosed, roofed, and sided, and the electrical and plumbing were roughed-in. The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed, and the Landes appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court. How should the Iowa Supreme Court rule in this case? Did Flynn substantially perform the contract despite the undisclosed materials markup?