This study examines the behavioral and perception differences of judges and quasi-judicial officers to discern if these individuals provide equitable and fair treatment to each citizen who appears in a courtroom. From the eight hypotheses, differences in the use and satisfaction of reference materials, as well as the perceived level of autonomy and discretion in completing daily activities help to reveal any differences that might exist. The lower-level state court judges and quasi-judicial officers' responses to a nine- question Qualtrics survey examines the positions and the legal training of both samples. Understanding these aspects can help the lower-level state judiciary system ultimately reduce both human and fiscal costs. Reductions in costs are important given the continually constrained budgets these entities face. It is critical to ensure that administering second-rate justice does not become the norm for the judicial system. This study examines only a small portion of the potential research in this area. From this study, a better understanding of the roles and responsibilities of judges and quasi-judicial officers is attainable.