Responses of 127 rural high school sophomores and juniors were used to examine 3 factors influencing judgments and disciplinary decisions of adolescent peer juries. The factors were levels of moral reasoning, gender of offender, and severity of the offender's act. Subjects first responded to a questionnaire testing moral development. The 113 usable questionnaires were ranked according to the percentage of principled reasoning; the upper and lower 36 were included in the remainder of the study. These 72 subjects were randomly assigned to read 1 of 4 vignettes describing identical misbehaviors by males or females. On the basis of questionnaire scores, they were assigned to high, low, or mixed score dyads. Statistical analysis revealed that the level of a student's moral development did not influence disciplinary decisions; disciplinary decisions were more severe for serious female misbehavior than for male; and disciplinary decisions made by dyads were not different from individual decisions or from each other. Future investigations could control for the sex of the subject and utilize a different sample, revised vignettes, and another model of moral development. Tables summarize responses of individuals and dyads. The four vignettes are appended. (PB)