The study used a quantitative analysis of records and a qualitative analysis of indepth interviews with key actors in the criminal justice system. Three conceptual models were used: Game Theory, based in the principle that 'game' participants use probability estimates to secure the best possible outcome for themselves; the Adversary Relationship, which addresses the limitations on victim service that inhere in the court's pursuit of justice and fairness; and Passive Judiciary, which pertains to the impact of plea bargaining. The findings indicate patterns of restitution use, criteria upon which restitution decisions are based, and justice officials' interpretation of the meaning of restitution. The models were evaluated against the findings to determine their relevance to victim service (restitution). The Passive Judiciary model was the most relevant for the use of restitution in the common pleas court, because the court's system needs influenced how restitution was used. The Adversary Relationship and Game Theory models best explain how restitution was used in municipal court, since victim outcomes were ignored in comparison to judicial and defendant interests in the outcome. Restitution was used infrequently in both types of courts. The study analyzed reasons for this and considered implications for court reform and new social work roles in sentencing and probation. Appended instruments, statistical tables, and other information and 70-item bibliography.