CA3: “[R]easonableness [of force] under the Fourth Amendment should frequently remain a question for the jury”

“Given the totality of the circumstances, the District Court erred in concluding as a matter of law that the use of force was objectively reasonable. See Giles v. Kearney, 571 F.3d 318, 327 n.4 (3d Cir. 2009) (denying summary judgment on the basis of a factual dispute over whether a plaintiff was ‘fully subdued’ when alleged excessive force occurred); cf. Abraham v. Raso, 183 F.3d 279, 290 (3d Cir. 1999) (‘[R]easonableness under the Fourth Amendment should frequently remain a question for the jury.’). Greene’s accounts are not so inconsistent, vague, or refuted by the record as to warrant summary judgment for Kelly and Valdivia. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255.” Greene v. Kelly, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 9200 (3d Cir. Apr. 6, 2022).