Case dismissed on summary judgement. The key issue was whether an insurance company, having settled a legal malpractice claim by paying $1.5 million, could then seek contribution from the same client's previous lawyers, asserting that errors by the first lawyers contributed to the indivisible harm suffered by the client. We argued that the alleged negligence of the original lawyers in pursuing a defective civil rights/RICO case could not have caused the entry of the Dragonetti judgment because the clients relied in good faith on the original lawyers in bringing that case, and such reliance is an absolute defense to the Dragonetti claim.