In the spring of 2022, Craig hired Paul to replace all of the docks at the marina. Although the contract specified that the dock's top surface decking would be made of pressure-treated wood, Paul used a composite material that was visually indistinguishable from the pressure-treated wood. The material used was comparably priced to pressure-treated wood and had comparable properties, including strength, slip and rot resistance, longevity, and maintenance requirements. When the work was completed Craig refused to pay Paul, claiming Paul had not performed in accordance with the contract. Paul commenced an action against Craig to recover damages for breach of contract. IRAC

1. Is Paul entitled to recover on his contract with Craig?

Issue:

Rule:

Analysis:

Conclusion: