1. Is it proper to deem an otherwise meritorious § 1983 claim "so clearly time-barred" that it is frivolous under § 1988 based solely on an uncertain analogous tort, or did the lower courts error by deeming the civil rights claim meritless and awarding prevailing defendant attorney's fees?

2. Was the lower court's award of defendants' attorney's fees properly calculated?

Whether a § 1983 civil rights claim can be deemed frivolous and time-barred solely based on an uncertain analogous tort, justifying prevailing defendant attorney's fees