The Gentrys contracted with Squires Construction to build a house. The Gentrys showed Squires a photograph of a house that they wanted their home to look like but did not provide Squires with any blueprints. Squires suggested that it use some of its own drawings to construct the house, which would save the Gentrys some money, as the Gentrys were concerned largely with cost and even agreed to perform some of the work on the house themselves. After Squires completed much of the construction, the Gentrys refused to provide the final payment through a lender, claiming that Squires had made mistakes in the construction, such as building the first floor with 8- instead of 10-foot ceilings, failing to caulk the windows, and creating problems with the front porch. Squires sued for breach of contract and, alternatively, for equitable relief under quantum meruit. The Gentrys counterclaimed, arguing that Squires had breached the contract. The trial court concluded that Squires had not substantially performed.

Did Squires successfully recover under the equitable remedy doctrine of quantum meruit? Why or why not? [Gentry v. Squires Constr., Inc., 2006 Tex. App. LEXIS 2299.]