An important development in the alternative dispute resolution (ADR) movement is court-annexed arbitration, a method by which courts refer some portion of their caseload to another forum for third party resolution. It is used for cases in which money damages fall within a certain range, generally between $10,000 and $50,000. An arbitrator meets with the parties and, after hearing evidence and testimony, renders an award. If accepted, the award is binding. Parties not accepting the award may appeal and seek a court trial de novo. Although 23 States and the District of Columbia now use some kind of arbitration program, its widespread adoption is still in the formative stage because it has been introduced only in selected trial courts to deal with particular types of cases. One of the objectives of court-annexed arbitration is to reduce the time from case filing to deposition. However, judges do not rid their calendars by referring cases to arbitration; they or their representatives must monitor and review arbitration cases. The cost of arbitration is unknown for three reasons: (1) cost estimates do not reflect time spent on monitoring or reviewing cases; (2) information is lacking on ultimate resolution of arbitration appeals; and (3) figures measure the relative efficiency of court processing versus arbitration. Quality in court-annexed arbitration encompasses four key components: (1) participant satisfaction tends to be overwhelmingly positive; compliance is related to the size of the award. Research shows that the success of arbitration hinges on its administration. Future research is needed to examine the extent to which different approaches to management affect the pace, cost, and quality of dispute processing. 19 footnotes.