Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al.
Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., refers to a case that was begun in the federal Western District of New York courthouse on August 4th, 2016. Civil Case # 16-cv-631, after over a year of waiting, and the recusal of the first assigned judge, His Honor Lawrence Vilardo, the case was then assigned to Chief Judge Frank P. Geraci Jr., ('Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al, Dist. Court, WD New York 2017.) Since the Diocese of Buffalo is under suit, and after a reading of the denied first amended complaint where Canisius College, (the almamater of His Honor Vilardo,) is also named in suit; the Chief Judge was assigned to this case. It has been verbally stated by Courtroom Deputy Giuseppe Ippolito for United States Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott, that at the installation ceremony of the new chief judge was present a Roman Catholic Priest. That the ceremony was referred to as the "vesting," of the federal judge. When it is commonly understood that labor union members' and priests' of the catholic persuasion are VESTED, and any members of a judiciary are ROBED. After an internet search of the last names A-R-L-O-T-T-A and G-E-R-A-C-I. Anyone with a general understanding of the ancient language of Latin, the Romance Languages', and a rudimentary understanding of the study of orthography, and the website: http://curlie.org/Regional/Europe/Italy/Society_and_Culture/Genealogy/Surnames/ specifically the Millemaci-Arlotta Family Discussion List. Will clearly see how the last names A-R-L-O-T-T-A and G-E-R-A-C-E are in the same discussion list. The general rudimentary understanding of orthography will indicate how both last names, (in the romance language of Italian and their English Counterparts,) hold virtually the same spellings'. A-R-L-O-T has the spelling variants' of the endings...A, I, O, etc... whereas, G-E-R-A-C- has the variants' of the endings...A, E, (and according to the current motion before his Honor Geraci's court Civil case #18-cv-457,) as listed on the publically accessed website, G-E-R-A-C-H-E, his honors G-E-R-A-C-I, and G-E-R-A-C-I-E. A further reading of the website http://curlie.org/Regional/Europe/Italy/Society_and_Culture/Genealogy/Surnames/, will also indicate how the last name Castronovo, the same last name from the trial U.S. v. Casamento 887 F. 2d 1141 (1989) from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit clearly establishes a unique conflict of interests for his honor Frank P. Geraci. Since he is currently a member of the Judicial Council for the Second Circuit. As he has familial ties with the plaintiff Pro Se and the former Frank Castronovo from the trial U.S. v. Casamento 887 F. 2d 1141 (1989) from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. A close scrutinized reading of the DECISION AND ORDER by the chief judge will indicate the numerous points' of contention. The most important being how the statute of limitations began de novo through the New York Court of Appeals decision on the case People v. Golb 2014 NY Slip Op 03426 [23 NY3d 455]. Specifically holding number three. Any further clarifications have been answered already. A close reading of the column at https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/almID/1202657982257/?slreturn=20180322154858 or https://www.nyclu.org/en/publications/column-annoying-first-amendment-thicket-aggravated-harassment-new-york-law-journal column entitled "COLUMN: THE ANNOYING FIRST AMENDMENT THICKET OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT (NEW YORK LAW JOURNAL)," Mr. Dunn further explicates through his citations of numerous federal district court decisions', and the Supreme Court of the U.S. decision in Abrams, 250 U.S. at 630, 40 S.Ct. 17 (1919), "But the Supreme Court has made very clear that such communications are fully protected speech that may not be proscribed or punished." Mr. Dunn is also quick to point out...."As such, Vives mailings are firmly protected by the First Amendment, and may not be proscribed or punished. Judge Scheindlin also ruled that, because Supreme Court law was so clear, the arresting officers were not entitled to qualified immunity from damages. The City appealed the qualified immunity ruling to the Second Circuit but offered only a half-hearted defense of the statute. And the Attorney General’s office again refused to defend the statute. Despite what this all clearly signaled about the statute’s constitutionality, the Court of Appeals refused to address the issue, claiming in a footnote that the challenge to the statute “was not properly presented to us” by virtue of the lack of briefing defending the law. This evasion drew a sharp dissent from Judge Richard Cardamone, who noted that “the constitutional issue before us is not particularly difficult, and the violation is particularly egregious.” And for him the constitutional analysis, given long established Supreme Court law, was straightforward: Speech of this sort may only be proscribed in three very limited circumstances: (1) the speech constitutes “fighting words” that “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace,” (2) the speech constitutes “advocacy [that] is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action,” and (3) the speech constitutes a “true threat” by which “the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.” Section 240.30(1) is not limited to these three categories." Since Mr. Arlotta has a current case before the Western District, (Pro Se also,) 18-cv-457 Arlotta v. McKesson Corporation et al., and has had other cases....Arlotta v. Bank of America et al., (that has been combined with Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al. in petition for writ of certiorari and affidavit for in forma pauperis currently before the Supreme Court of the U.S.. Along with Arlotta v. Cook Moving Systems Inc. and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 264, which has been petitioned for writ of certiorari and affidavit in forma pauperis since the case has not been decided in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and is of significant national interests' regarding the decision from the high court case docket #16-1466 Janus v. American Federation,) the chief judge has clearly indicated how this federal district's court is so reluctant to follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding Pro Se Litigants', how the Vatican has attempted to stifle and "hush," the impending suit. Since the Diocese of Buffalo et al. was never served a copy of the complaint by the U.S. Marshals service. Considering the Pro Se Plaintiff was granted in forma pauperis, according to title 28 U.S.C. § 1915, "(d) The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in such cases. Witnesses shall attend as in other cases, and the same remedies shall be available as are provided for by law in other cases. (e)(1) The court may request an attorney to represent any person unable to afford counsel." Yet, all the parties were all served process for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, never answered the documents as it has not been recorded in the docket history of appeal dockets' #17-2945, (Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al.,) #17-2964, (Arlotta v. Bank of America et al.,) and finally, #17-4084, (Arlotta v. Cook Moving Systems Inc. et al.). "Judge" Geraci and his law clerks obviously have problems with researching matters' in a diligent competent manner. Since the plaintiff Pro Se was denied the right to attend the "trial or hearing," as noted in a search of www.pacer.gov, cases' # 16-cv-631, 16-cv-792, and case # 17-cv-624, furthering the un-constitutionality of the court proceedings according to the fourteenth amendment. Not to mention a rudimentary internet search of the familial relationship between the Castronovos', (from the trial U.S. v. Casamento 887 F. 2d 1141 (1989) decided in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,) Arlottas', (referring to PLAINTIFF PRO SE...JAMES ARLOTTA,) through a basic internet search of the surname(s)' Arlotta, Casamento, Castronovo, and Geraci. Along with the various orthographic, (through the original Latinized, to romance language of Modern Italian to English,) surname(s)' spellings. In violation of title 28 U.S.C. § 144 bias or prejudice of judge, and more specifically title 28 U.S.C. § 455 disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge. Under..."(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Due to the highly sensitive nature of the defamatory, libelous, and slanderous nature of Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al., and the fact that plaintiff Pro Se is "related," to Phil Arlotta, brother of Vincent (father of plaintiff Pro Se,) as Phil and his family of procreation have a direct relationship with Fr. Paul D. Seil of St. Bernadettes Roman Catholic Parish through Phil's daughter Julie. It should be noted that the conflicts of interest by the Diocese of Buffalo and Archdiocese of New York are so significant that plaintiff Pro Se's communication(s)' have been diminished significantly. So much so that plaintiff Pro Se himself is now a victim of NY PEN 240.30(1)(a). That he has become a "prisoner in his own home."
References[edit]
Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al, Dist. Court, WD New York 2017 http://www.nywd.uscourts.gov/ curlie.org/Regional/Europe/Italy/Society_and_Culture/Genealogy/Surnames/ http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/ http://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/almID/1202657982257/?slreturn=20180322154858 https://www.nyclu.org/en/publications/column-annoying-first-amendment-thicket-aggravated-harassment-new-york-law-journal https://www.supremecourt.gov/ https://www.pacer.gov/ http://uscode.house.gov/ http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/lawssrch.cgi?NVLWO:
This article "Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al." is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Arlotta v. Diocese of Buffalo et al.. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
