The Mishna rules that if a Kuti (Samaritan) is signed on a document, it is valid only for a divorce or emancipation document, but not other documents. Why? There are three opinions regarding the status of Kutim – according to whose opinion does the Mishna correspond? At first, it seems like it doesn’t fit with any of them, but then the Gemara figures out how to explain the Mishna according to Rabbi Elazar. What assumptions can be made about the signing of a divorce document from this answer? A document effected in a non-Jewish court is not accepted for divorce or emancipation but is for other documents. Does this include all other documents, including gifts whereby the ownership is transferred by the document alone? And if so, this can only be because of Shmuel’s opinion that we hold by the court system of the country as dina de’malchuta dina, the law of the land is the law! How can Rabbi Shimon accept the document of divorce from a gentile court if they don’t have the same divorce laws as us? Is it because Rabbi Shimon holds like Rabbi Elazar that we rely on the witnesses who witnessed the woman receiving the divorce document, not the witnesses who signed the document? However, this answer is difficult as well.