ONE SYSTEM CONTAINS A DATA BASE OF THE FULL TEXT OF FEDERAL CASES, CASES FROM SEVERAL OF THE LARGER STATES, AND SOME SPECIALIZED LIBRARIES. THE SECOND SYSTEM CONTAINS HEADNOTES TO ALL FEDERAL AND STATE CASES. A THIRD SYSTEM, DEVELOPED BY A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, IS A HYBRID OF THE FIRST TWO AND IS CONSIDERED LESS EXTENSIVELY. THE EVALUATION INVOLVED INSTALLATION OF TERMINALS FOR THE TWO MAJOR SYSTEMS IN SELECTED FEDERAL COURTS, FIELD EXPERIMENTS COMPARING COMPUTERIZED AND MANUAL PROCEDURES, SURVEYS OF COURT OFFICERS WHO USED THE TEST TERMINALS, AND AN EXPERIMENT WITH THE USE OF RESEARCH SPECIALISTS TO PROVIDE RESEARCH SERVICES FROM A CENTRAL TERMINAL SITE. THE EVALUATION REVEALS THAT COMPUTERIZED SYSTEMS SAVE TIME, BUT NOT ENOUGH TIME TO JUSTIFY THEIR COST ON THAT BASIS ALONE. BOTH SYSTEMS, BUT PARTICULARLY THE FULL-TEXT SYSTEM, IMPROVED THE QUALITY OF RESEARCH. THE AVAILABILITY OF A STATE DATA BASE WAS FOUND NOT TO BE A FACTOR IN CHOOSING A SYSTEM FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS. THE CENTRALIZED RESEARCH SPECIALIST APPROACH PROVED USEFUL. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADOPTING THE FULL-TEXT SYSTEM AND ALLOCATING TERMINALS AMONG FEDERAL COURTS ARE PRESENTED. ESTABLISHMENT OF CENTRALIZED RESEARCH SERVICES IN TWO CIRCUITS IS ALSO RECOMMENDED. SUPPORTING DATA AND DOCUMENTATION ARE INCLUDED. (LKM)