THE FOLLOWING SAMPLES WERE DRAWN FOR THE SURVEY: (1) THE GENERAL PUBLIC (N=1,931), STATE AND LOCAL JUDGES (N=194), FEDERAL JUDGES (N=97), LAWYERS (N=440), COMMUNITY LEADERS WITH STATE/LOCAL ORIENTATION (N=278), AND COMMUNITY LEADERS WITH NATIONAL ORIENTATION (N=102). INTERVIEWS WERE CONDUCTED IN PERSON DURING OCTOBER-DECEMBER 1977, USING ONE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND A SECOND QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE SPECIAL PUBLICS. ANALYSIS INCLUDED CROSSBREAKS BY DEMOGRAPHIC AND ATTITUDINAL VARIABLES AND MULTIVARIATE TECHNIQUES. FINDINGS LED TO THE FOLLOWING GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE GENERAL PUBLIC: (1) KNOWLEDGE OF AND EXPERIENCE WITH THE COURTS IN LOW; (2) THERE IS DISSATISFACTION WITH COURT PERFORMANCE; (3) DISSATISFACTION STEMS FROM PERCEPTIONS THAT THE COURTS HAVE FAILED TO PROTECT SOCIETY, DISPENSE EQUAL JUSTICE, AND RENDER QUALITY PERFORMANCE; (4) KNOWLEDGE OF AN EXPERIENCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL COURTS HEIGHTENS CRITICISM OF THEM, BUT THIS RELATIONSHIP DOES NOT HOLD FOR FEDERAL COURTS; AND (5) DESPITE DISSATISFACTION WITH COURTS, THERE IS A WILLINGNESS TO INVEST TAX MONEY AN EFFORT IN THEIR IMPROVEMENT. THE SPECIAL PUBLICS GENERALLY EXPRESSED A DESIRE FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE COURTS; HOWEVER, THERE IS A LACK OF CONSENSUS ABOUT THE EXTENT OF REFORM AND THE REASONS GIVEN FOR REFORM. IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS FOR COURT REFORM ARE DISCUSSED, AND TABULAR DATA DERIVED FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC QUESTIONNNAIRE ARE PROVIDED, ALONG WITH SAMPLES OF QUESTIONNAIRE MATERIALS. (RCB)