Factors are outlined that have contributed to court concern for case management, and a review of the relevant literature shows that case management is a subject fraught with definitional and implementation complexities. Findings show that caseflow mangement needs of trial courts vary according to each court's particular characteristics. Courts differ in jurisdiction, resources, personnel, clientele, and purpose. Some of the recent empirical research on courts fails to illuminate these differences. In particular, there is an underlying assumption that the research done on felony courts is germane to misdemeanor courts. To date, the literature has emphasized the need to reduce delay, impose case processing time standards, and apply technical innovations (case assignment systems). The manner in which a court may decipher its own caseflow problems and implement appropriate management innovations receives considerably less emphasis in the literature. Detailed descriptive analyses of courts' implementation efforts, with greater emphasis on the behavioral aspects of the change, would be a valuable addition to the literature. With respect to misdemeanor courts in particular, the following issues warrant closer scrutiny: (1) the relevance to misdemeanor courts of stringent caseflow management standards to reduce delay, (2) the implications for case management of the discretion and flexibility required in misdemeanor courts in order to maintain equilibrium amoung competing interests, and (3) the socialization of judges to commitment to case management. A total of 46 references are listed. (Author abstract modified)