William P. Grise, et al. v. Ronald T. Allen, et al.

Whether a Federal court may employ judicial estoppel to give preclusive effect to an oral stipulation as to probable cause for a person’s arrest in a Kentucky court, and refuse to employ the decision of the Supreme Court of Kentucky adopting the Restatement (Second) of Judgments, §27 (1982) in Yeoman v. Commw. Health Policy Board, 983 S.W.2d 459 (Ky, 1998), and thereby affirm the dismissal of that person’s 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of criminal process, failure to train and supervise, negligent hiring, training, supervision and retention, and unlawful search.

Whether an oral stipulation as to probable cause with respect to a person’s arrest, without any accompanying agreement by that person to waive the filing of a civil action challenging the lawfulness of the arrest and the charges against the person, “actually litigates and actually decides” the lawfulness of the arrest and the charges so as to preclude the filing of a civil action challenging same under the Restatement (Second) of Judgments, §27.

Whether an oral stipulation as to probable cause with respect to a person’s arrest, without any accompanying agreement by the person to waive the filing of a civil action challenging the lawfulness of the arrest and the charges against the person, “actually litigates and actually decides” the lawfulness of a warrantless search of the house of that person under the Restatement (Second) of Judgments, §27.

Whether a warrantless search of a person’s home may be performed by a peace officer as a “protective