1. Did the Second Circuit err in applying District
of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (2018), to grant
qualified immunity to the police defendants who arrested the plaintiff partygoers for trespass where, unlike the officers in Wesby, the police defendants
submitted perjured statements concerning the factual
basis for the arrests and never determined whether
the partygoers had permission to be present in the
property; and where there were numerous disputes of
material fact as to the condition of the premises?

2. Did the Second Circuit err in holding that a
civil rights plaintiff must show subjective malice by police defendants in order to assert a Fourth Amendment
post-arrest, pre-trial wrongful seizure claim, since the
Fourth Amendment employs a standard of objective
reasonableness, and there is a split of circuit authority
on the need to show malice?

Did the Second Circuit err in applying District of Columbia v. Wesby to grant qualified immunity to the police defendants who arrested the plaintiff partygoers for trespass?