Catcher's Obstruction with Malicious Contact - Did we get it right?

[scarolinablue]

Sitch: (NFHS) Bases loaded, 1 out. B/R obstructed by the catcher as he hits a ground ball to F4. I (PU) give delayed dead ball sign and watch the play develop. F4 opts to tag R1 and then throw to first for the DP. However, R1 brings his arms up and extends...obvious malicious contact call, made immediately by my partner. Kills the play, declares the interference and gets the third out at first on the B/R, subsequently declared the malicious contact, ejects R1.

Now, lots of commotion, offensive coach coming out to question the malicious call, defensive team running off the field, and I'm waving my hands and shouting (as it was loud) "I have catcher's obstruction." By this time, both coaches are in the area behind the pitcher's mound as my partner and I converge to discuss the play and the options. At our request to move away, neither coach moved more than 5 feet, so we removed ourselves by 15-20 feet and began to discuss. At the same time we're discussing the play, the opposing coaches begin to jaw at one another and almost come together, stopped by me stepping between them and the assistants restraining them. We ordered both teams to the dugouts immediately to restore some order.

What we determined was this: Working under the assumption the offensive coach would not want the resulting double play and would apply the catcher's obstruction, we awarded the B/R first base, R2 third base, and R3 scored, with R1 declared out as a result of the malicious contact and ejected from the game. Now we have two outs, runners on first and third, and the coaches restricted to the dugouts for good measure.

Did we get it right (other than wishing we would have dumped the coaches just on general principle, since both are Class A rats)? Our reasoning was that by applying the obstruction, all runners are protected to move up one base, due to being forced up by the B/R being awarded 1B. However, in FED, since malicious contact supercedes obstruction, then R1 is declared out as a result of the malicious contact (3-3-1n). Should R2 and R3 been allowed to advance, then, given that R1 never actually gained second base?

Edited to fix the runner's nomenclature. My apologies for a substandard post.