a “bona fide creditor is entitled to payment regardless of the judgment’s validity, that creditor is not unjustly enriched by retention of the payment after the judgment’s reversal.” Cox, 780 N.E.2d at 962, In other words, because Burrle’s payment to Woodbridge Baric discharged an unconditional, bona fide obligation, Woodbridge Baric is not liable in restitution to the settlement program. See id. Treating an attorney with a contingency fee agreement as standing in his or her client’s shoes is only warranted to the extent the attorney’s claim against the client rests solely upon the now-failed contingency. See Mohamed, 91 F.3d at 1127 (remanding for determination of the portion of proceeds retained by attorney that represented payment of a contingent fee); Abrahami, 670 N.Y.S.2d at 468 (<HOLDING>); ef. Ehsani, 159 P.3d at 411 (“[T]here is no
holding contingency fee cases commenced prior to dissolution are assets of the firm holding that contingency fee contract did not cap award of attorneys fees where johnson had so held holding that a law firm could intervene in a former clients action to protect its interest in its contingency fee holding that an attorney was entitled to a quantum meruit recovery even though his oral contingency fee agreement with the client violated the ind rules of professional conduct which require a contingency fee agreement to be in writing holding that law firm was liable for restitution of contingency fee but not of other noncontingent fees following vacatur of judgment