Three predominantly rural counties and one predominantly urban county were selected for the study. The State police provided data on protective orders by county for fiscal year 2002. Court docket data were collected by researchers who observed 99 percent of the court sessions in the urban area and 92 percent of the court session in the rural area during fiscal year 2002. Case outcomes were recorded. Data were also obtained from key informant interviews and focus groups of 128 women without protective orders and 450 women who received protective orders. The process of protective orders was significantly different between rural and urban areas. Nonservice rates were much higher in rural areas; rural women were charged for the orders to be served; fewer cases were adjudicated during the study period in rural areas; a greater proportion of cases were classified into the preadjudication category in the rural areas; and women in rural areas had to spend more time and effort to obtain a protective order. Barriers to receiving protective orders for both rural and urban areas were statutory problems, victim's fear of the perpetrator, lack of resources for leaving the abuser, and lack of knowledge about protective orders. Rural areas apparently had more barriers to obtaining and enforcing protective orders than the urban area. Women who sought protective orders reported extensive violence histories, but victimization experiences differed for rural and urban women. Also, there were differences in protective order stipulations, violations, and perceived effectiveness of protective orders between rural and urban women. Implications are drawn for training criminal justice personnel. 6 tables and 60 references