Data considered in this paper were available in State court reports collected by the National Center for State Courts. Additional information was obtained from the American Judicature Society, surveys published by the Department of Justice, and from judges attending the National Judicial College in 1979. The data indicate that courts of limited jurisdiction number some 18,000, that they are diverse, and that they carry a large share of the States' trial caseload with considerably reduced resources. It is estimated that they hear 90 percent of the nation's criminal cases. There is a great range of organizational patterns and personnel qualifications. General jurisdiction courts hear a significantly greater proportion of civil cases, a principal distinction between the caseloads of the two courts. From their inception in the 14th century, the lower courts were designed to provide rapid, localized justice for less serious offenses and matters. Criticisms which have been levied against the lower courts have focused on their informality, lack of due process, and lack of uniformity. However, limited jurisdiction courts can function as a major resource for community-based dispute resolution. Moreover, the movement toward negotiated settlements, mediation, and social service treatment does not necessarily deny the need for courts as umbrella institutions for dispute resolution. Issues to be addressed in future research include creating access to resolution mechanisms and formalizing the alternative styles and procedures of a variety of kinds of adjudication within a judicial framework. Appendixes, 37 tables, and 158 references are provided.