THE REPORT, PART OF A SERIES OF 11 SUCH WORKS, IS THE PRODUCT OF AN EXTENSIVE DATA COLLECTION EFFORT UNDERTAKEN IN AUGUST 1978 AS PART OF A NATIONAL EXAMINATION OF APPELLATE COURT DELAY PROBLEMS. TWO TYPES OF INFORMATION WERE USED. THE FIRST TYPE OF INFORMATION IS DESCRIPTIVE AND CONCERNS COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES; IT WAS ACQUIRED THROUGH SITE VISITS TO THE COURT. THE SECOND TYPE OF INFORMATION IS QUANTITATIVE DATA WHICH DESCRIBE THE COURT'S CASELOAD IN TERMS OF CASE CHARACTERISTICS AND TIME LAPSE IN PROCESSING. THE QUANTITATIVE DATA WERE DERIVED FROM A SYSTEMATIC SAMPLE DRAWN FROM THE COURT RECORDS OF 503 CASES PROCESSED FROM 1975 THROUGH 1976. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE PREDECISION PHASES OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS PRESENT PROBLEMS FOR THE COURT. CASES OFTEN EXCEED THE COURT'S TIME LIMITS FOR FILING BRIEFS, RECORDS, AND TRANSCRIPTS. LITIGANTS USUALLY WAIT A SUBSTANTIAL LENGTH OF TIME FOR THEIR CASES TO BE HEARD BY THE COURT. THE SOURCES OF THIS WAITING DELAY APPEAR TO BE THE LARGE CASE BACKLOG AND THE COURT'S POLICY LIMITING THE NUMBER OF CASES HEARD EACH MONTH. TIME LAPSE DATA INDICATE THAT THE COURT OPERATES EFFICIENTLY AT THE DECISION STAGE ONCE CASES ARE CALENDARED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT. THE COURT IS URGED TO GIVE TOP PRIORITY TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSING OF MORE CASES, THUS ELIMINATING THE LARGE BACKLOG. SUGGESTED TECHNIQUES INCLUDE EFFECTIVE SCREENING MECHANISMS FOR SELECTING CASES FOR VOLUNTARY DISPOSITION WITHOUT ORAL ARGUMENT, ELIMINATING SCHEDULING POLICIES WHICH LIMIT THE NUMBER OF CASES WHICH CAN BE HEARD EACH MONTH, AND ELIMINATING OR ALTERING THE RULE WHICH REQUIRES THAT EVERY ISSUE RAISED IN BRIEFS MUST BE FORMALLY ADDRESSED IN THE OPINIONS OF THE OHIO COURT OF APPEALS. IMPLEMENTATION OF A CASE TRACKING SYSTEM IS RECOMMENDED. FOOTNOTES, TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDIXES WITH STUDY DATA ARE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT.