The theory was elaborated from the single hypothesis typically posed into a broad range of possible interactions that include likely reciprocal causation. The results failed to support the hypothesis that more trials increase congestion due to the fact that they overburden the court. Scant support emerged for the hypothesis that more trials reduce congestion, either because the court is working to dispose of more cases or because the court has improved caseflow procedures. Criminal case processing was found to be dominated by the volume of filings. Most other factors examined had little or no impact. Criminal case flow appeared to be funneled through a rigid pipeline: cases came into the system, were processed, and departed on such a regular basis that other factors appeared to have little impact. A bibliography is included. 8 tables