THE MODEL APPLIES TO THE BEHAVIOR OF ANY COURT SYSTEM COMPONENT, BUT THE DISCUSSION FOCUSES ON THE 'TRIAL PARTS' COMPONENT. (OTHER COMPONENTS INCLUDE GRAND JURIES, ARRAIGNMENT PARTS, AND SPECIAL PARTS PECULIAR TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS OR TO PARTICULAR COURT SYSTEMS). THE TERM 'PART' REFERS TO THE COMMON CONCEPT OF A COURTROOM, STAFFED BY A JUDGE, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, A CLERICAL STAFF, AND (SOMETIMES) PUBLIC DEFENDERS. THE MODEL HOLDS THAT TRIAL PARTS WILL SCHEDULE AS MANY CASES AS ARE AVAILABLE FOR CALENDARING UP TO A MAXIMUM AVERAGE DAILY CALENDAR SIZE. THE NUMBER OF CASES SEEN PER DAY WILL DETERMINE THE NUMBER OF DISPOSITIONS PER DAY AND THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF ADJOURNMENT. THIS VIEW ASSUMES THAT COURT POLICY AND PRACTICE ESTABLISH CALENDAR SIZES, WHICH IN TURN DETERMINE AVERAGE ADJOURNMENT LENGTH. HOWEVER, THE MODEL CAN ACCOMMODATE AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW--THAT COURT POLICY IS MORE CONCERNED WITH LENGTH OF ADJOURNMENT, SO THAT COURT PRACTICE ASSOCIATED WITH ADJOURNMENT LENGTH FIXES CALENDAR SIZE. DIAGRAMS DEPICT HOW THE MODEL DESCRIBES COURT SYSTEM BEHAVIOR IN TERMS OF RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE FOLLOWING VARIABLES: NUMBER OF CASES PENDING, AVERAGE DAILY INPUT, AVERAGE DAILY DISPOSITIONS, AVERAGE DAILY CALENDAR SIZE OF A TRIAL PART, NUMBER OF TRIAL PARTS, TOTAL OF ALL AVERAGE DAILY CALENDAR SIZES, AVERAGE LENGTH OF ADJOURNMENT, AVERAGE RATIO OF CASES ADJOURNED ON DAILY CALENDARS, AVERAGE NUMBER OF APPEARANCES PER CASE REQUIRED FOR A TRIAL PART DISPOSITION, AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS FOR CASE DISPOSITION IN A TRIAL PART, MINIMUM AVERAGE CALENDAR SIZE, MINIMUM AVERAGE LENGTH OF ADJOURNMENT (BASED ON NONCOURT RESOURCE-RELATED FACTORS), DESIRED AVERAGE LENGTH OF ADJOURNMENT, EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF TRIAL PARTS, AND DAYS 'SAT' (IN SESSION) AS A FRACTION OF POSSIBLE DAYS SAT. USES OF THE MODEL IN UNDERSTANDING THE FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS AMONG COURT ACTIVITIES, IN PLANNING MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS THAT WILL PROVIDE TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT CONTROL AND POLICYMAKING SUPPORT AS WELL AS DAY-TO-DAY ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT, AND IN RESOURCE PLANNING ARE DEMONSTRATED. AN EXTENDED VERSION OF THE MODEL THAT INCORPORATES MORE FEEDBACK RELATIONSHIPS IS DEPICTED BUT NOT DEFINED QUANTITATIVELY. THE SIMPLICITY OF THE MODEL IS SAID TO MAKE IT ESPECIALLY VALUABLE TO PERSONS WHO ARE NOT QUANTITATIVELY ORIENTED. (LKM)