In March 1987, a jury awarded a severely disabled man a sum of $1,007,000, for paying his medical bills and assisting him through a lifetime of necessary medical care. Judge Antonio Almeida awarded the man's lawyer a sum of $435,100 - 76% of the net verdict of $595,527, the amount available after the payment of medical expenses to the State of Rhode Island. How did this happen? Judge Antonio Almeida had taken a bribe of $18,000 from the man's lawyer. However, the Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled that the corrupt judge Almeida, in his official capacity (a man who after being apprehended and charged with accepting bribes refused to cooperate with authorities) enjoyed absolute judicial immunity from civil suit. By issuing this ruling, the high court unjustly denied a disabled man restitution and punitive damages that would possibly have remedied the harm caused by such criminal judicial conduct. Despite the fact that the Rhode Island Constitution, Article 1, Section 5, prohibits the purchase or sale of justice, the high court insists on using old English law to uphold its claim to complete judicial immunity, no matter how criminal the act. Read the brief and the ruling.