Attorney B referred nine gas refinery explosion personal injury cases to Attorney 0. B and 0 had a 50-50 percent fee-sharing agreement that complied with California’s laws and ethical rules. The agreement included a provision requiring B to pay “investigation fees” that would be incurred by I, an investigator (who was a disbarred lawyer). 0 was successful in trying or settling all nine cases; his attorney’s fees were in the millions. About half way through the progress of the cases, B refused to pay I. Although g performed many services in the personal injury cases, 0 refused to pay any further fees to B and paid I himself. B sued 0 to enforce the fee-sharing agreement for the balance of his share of the fees. 0 claimed that B was barred from any further fees because B’s breach of their agreement (that B would pay I) discharged his obligations to pay B any more fees. 0 also claimed restitution for B’s share of the previously, paid fees because B shared them illegally with the disbarred-former-lawyer-investigator, I. B’s response was that he and I had a contract dispute, but it had nothing to do with 0. 0 is obligated to keep paying B in accordance with their agreement. Who should prevail in this contract dispute? What about I? Is he entitled to money under the agreement with B? To help you with your answer, see Brown v. Grimes (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 265.