The 8-week study of the court used the participant observation method. Of the 190 cases observed, 96 concerned delinquency and the rest concerned traffic, adoption, termination of parental rights, or neglect and dependency. Data were also collected through interviews and examination of official records. Results suggested that the meaning of juvenile justice is found in the individual judge's definition of what is in the best interests of society and children. The needs of society and the needs of juveniles are not always the same, however. Legal proscription, lack of resources, and community reactions may prevent judges from acting on what they believe to be the child's best interests. The rules used in juvenile justice provide protection for the court, society, and children. Four basic variables constitute justice for juveniles: rules, probable outcomes, care and protection concepts, and society's values and aims. Specific behaviors of the judge relate directly to elements of this model. Juvenile court judges must constantly resolve conflicts between such alternatives as conservation and change, the individual and society, and freedom and necessity. The failure of juvenile justice strongly suggests the need for changing the implementation of justice. Findings indicate the needs for both additional research and clarification of what is best for society and children in relation to realistic juvenile court functioning. Footnotes, figures, tables, and a bibliography listing 109 references are included.