## Facts

- A decedent died leaving an estate that appeared to have no known heirs.
- David Arkules, operating as an “heir finder” through International Investigations, Inc., located potential heirs, including Joseph Landi.
- Landi entered a contingent-fee agreement under which Arkules would investigate, identify, and prove Landi’s heirship and secure Landi’s share of the estate.
- Arkules performed heir-finding and investigative services but did not hold an Arizona private investigator license.
- After Landi was recognized as an heir in probate, Landi refused to pay and sued to have the agreement declared unenforceable and to bar any recovery.

## Issues

1. Whether an heir-finder/investigative services contract is enforceable when the service provider acted as a private investigator without the license required by Arizona statute.
2. If the contract is unenforceable due to statutory illegality, whether the unlicensed provider may recover in quantum meruit, restitution, or other equitable theories for services performed.

## Decision

- The court affirmed summary judgment for Landi.
- The agreement was unenforceable because Arkules’s services fell within Arizona’s statutory definition of private investigation and he lacked the required license.
- Arkules was denied any recovery, including quantum meruit or restitution, because allowing equitable relief would defeat the protective purpose of the regulatory licensing scheme.

## Legal Principles

- Contracts made in violation of a regulatory licensing statute enacted to protect the public are illegal and unenforceable.
- Where a licensing requirement is regulatory (not merely revenue-raising), courts generally deny contract enforcement and also deny restitutionary recovery to unlicensed practitioners.
- An unlicensed party cannot avoid the effect of a protective licensing statute by recasting a barred contract claim as unjust enrichment, quantum meruit, or restitution.

## Conclusion

Because the private investigator licensing statutes were regulatory and Arkules performed covered investigative services without a license, the contingent-fee heir-finder agreement was unenforceable and Arkules was barred from both contractual and equitable compensation.


Landi v. Arkules, 835 P.2d 458 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1992)