Whether dismissal of a Monell claim is proper where all underlying claims against officers have been dismissed

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This matter involves a Monell claim based on false arrest and malicious prosecution arising out of a warrantless and non-consensual search of Plaintiffs apartment by Newark police officers. The officers seized 2 clear bags and 37 vials of crack cocaine, 126 glassine envelopes of heroin, all of which were suppressed during Plaintiffs criminal proceedings under the doctrine. Concurrently, the United States Department of Justice was concluding an investigation into the Newark Police Department, which resulted in a Consent Decree two years later. The issues presented are as follows: (1) Whether, under City of Los Angeles v. Heller, 475 U.S. 796, 799 (1986), dismissal of a Monell claim should be affirmed, where all of the underlying claims against the officers have been dismissed. (2) Whether, under Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 681 (2009), a plausible inference from a Consent Decree, includes inferences that contradict the plain terms of the Consent Decree. (3) Whether, under United States v. Tohono O'Odham Nation, 563 U.S. 307, 317 (2011), res judicata estops Plaintiff, as between Plaintiffs criminal and subsequent civil-rights proceedings. (4) Whether dismissal of a Monell claim should be affirmed, where Plaintiff is estopped from denying that his apartment building was known to be frequented by drug users and from denying that copious amounts of contraband and _ drug paraphernalia were discovered in his kitchen. i