THE ALLOCATION OF SCARCE RESOURCES INVOLVES DECISIONMAKING AS TO THE VALUE WHICH SOCIETY PLACES ON EACH ACTIVITY. EXPENDITURE STATISTICS AS INDICATORS OF THE PRIORITY WHICH STATES PLACE ON THEIR COURT SYSTEMS DO NOT NECESSARILY FUNCTION AS INDICATORS OF THE QUALITY OF COURT SERVICES. INDEED, RAW EXPENDITURE DATA MAY NOT REFLECT THE RESOURCES WHICH STATES DEVOTE TO COURTS, BUT IF PROPERLY ADJUSTED THEY MAY PROVIDE A PERSPECTIVE ON THE VARYING COMMITMENT OF STATES TO THEIR COURTS. ONE WAY TO CIRCUMVENT THE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY THE UNRELIABILITY AND VOLATILITY OF GENERAL STATISTICS IS TO EXCLUDE CAPITAL EXPENDITURES FROM DATA IN A STATE-BY-STATE SURVEY, AND LIMIT THE INTERSTATE COMPARISON LIMITED TO ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENSES. USE OF PER CAPITA FIGURES REDUCES THE DISPROPORTIONATE IMAGE OF THE MORE POPULOUS STATES, AND INDICATES THAT RURAL STATES, SUCH AS ALASKA, HAVE A RELATIVELY HIGH EXPENDITURE FOR JUDICIAL SERVICES. COST OF LIVING FIGURES WHICH VARY BETWEEN THE STATES SHOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED IN ANY ACCURATE COMPARISON OF PRIORITIES. ADJUSTMENTS FOR LOCAL INFLATION INDICATE THAT SOME JURISDICTIONS ACTUALLY DECREASED EXPENDITURES FOR THEIR JUDICIARY BETWEEN 1972 AND 1976. ONE INDICATION OF STATES' WILLINGNESS TO SUPPORT THEIR JUDICIARY CAN BE OBTAINED BY DIVIDING THE JUDICIAL OPERATING EXPENSES OF EACH STATE BY ITS TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR ALL ACTIVITIES. ON THIS INDICATOR, FLORIDA AND DELAWARE ARE THE STATES THAT SACRIFICE MORE OF THEIR FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO SUPPORT THEIR COURTS. TABULAR DATA AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)