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 INFORMATION CONCERNING COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES, 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 489 CASES PROCESSED FROM 1975 THROUGH 1976. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE PREDECISION PHASES OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS IS THE PRINCIPAL SITE OF DELAY IN THE DIVISION. CASES OFTEN EXCEED THE LIMITS SET BY THE COURT RULE FOR FILING BRIEFS, RECORDS, AND TRANSCRIPTS. ATTORNEYS, LOWER COURT CLERKS, AND REPORTERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DELAY AT THIS STAGE. LITIGANTS MUST WAIT A SUBSTANTIAL LENGTH OF TIME FOR THEIR CASES TO BE HEARD. TIME LAPSE DATA REVEALED THAT THE COURT WAS OPERATING EFFICIENTLY AT THE DECISION STAGE. HOWEVER, EVEN THOUGH CASE DECISION TIMES WERE SHORT, THE COURT MAY NOT BE HEARING ENOUGH CASES. THE DIVISION IS URGED TO GIVE TOP PRIORITY TO DEVELOPING AND IMPLEMENTING TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSING OF MORE CASES. THESE TECHNIQUES COULD INCLUDE BETTER UTILIZATION OF CENTRAL STAFF AVAILABLE FOR CASE SCREENING, POLICIES WHICH DELEGATE MORE AUTHORITY TO THE STAFF FOR HANDLING ROUTINE MOTIONS, FORMAL MECHANISMS FOR INCREASING JUDGE COLLEGIALITY AND RESOLVING PANEL CONFLICTS, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF ALTERNATE METHODS OF DECISIONMAKING SUCH AS APPELLATE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCES. CASE TRACKING AND RECORDKEEPING PROCEDURES SHOULD BE IMPROVED. FOOTNOTES, TABLES, FIGURES, AND APPENDIXES ARE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT.