[AtlUmpSteve]

Oops. You are correct, I did misread the play. And, I agree now with your ruling; false, only one out. But, I have a differing rationale, which can end in a different twist.

Agreed the IFR out isn't recorded until all the necessary elements exist; and that requires the fair ball. When B3 contacts the ball in fair territory, that makes the ball fair by rule, and we do have interference, as the interference would supercede the IFR and make the dead ball we all agree we need to have. BUT, let me add that the current rule (which I have not seen in a 2007 rulebook) reportedly does NOT require "intent", rather it requires "actively".

In my mind, at least, this interference was, in fact "active"; but no other play was described as being interfered with. No description of other runners attempting to advance when this ball dropped. So, the BR only confirmed the out that the IFR would have created. In a way, the antithesis of a BR kicking a foul ball to keep it foul, this dummy contacted a fair ball to confirm their out. In a case where the runners were attempting to advance, this "active" interference could be properly considered a doubleplay, with the runner closest to home being out.

But, not this play, not as described.