Whether the Petitioner's Seventh Amendment rights were violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I) Whether the _ Petitioner’s Seventh Amendment rights were violated when the trial court weighed evidence and drew inferences against Petitioner in setting aside a verdict in his favor in contravention of this Court’s decision in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., 530 U.S. 138, 120 S.Ct. 2097, 147 L.Ed.2d 105 (2000). Il) Whether a municipality known to have a “culture of corruption” and for having “engaged in a protracted pattern of racketeering activity,” including “multiple acts of theft, fraud, burglary, torture and other violent crimes against civilians,” can be held liable under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for injuries resulting from the conscience shocking use of force by a police officer the municipality failed to train on the proper use of force? Ill)Whether the Single Occurrence Rule originating from City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 109 S. Ct. 1197 (1989) is a viable theory for holding a municipality liable in finding sufficient evidence of a custom of tacitly condoning police officers’ unjustified use of deadly force to establish municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. §1983.