The fonds consists of registers of criminal convictions of the Criminal Court (established in 1459) and the accompanying alphabetical indexes and covers the period from the 15th century to the beginning of the 19th century. Criminal convictions reached after 1667 have been fully preserved, and those of earlier times have been preserved partially. Usually, at the end of each conviction there is a reference code of the corresponding lawsuit and investigation procedure, which were entered in the registers of Lamenta Criminalia (HR-DADU-20) and Lamenta de criminali (HR-DADU-21). As a result, it is much easier to get information about complete court proceedings: from filing a lawsuit to reaching a judgement. It is a characteristic of the Dubrovnik Criminal Court that it rarely rendered judgements, most likely because most disputes ended in conciliation of the warring parties.

The fact that the Criminal Court rarely rendered judegements is also visible in cases involving Jewish people. An analysis of criminal cases in which Jews appear either in the role of prosecutors or defendants has provided the following outcome: the percentage of convictions in lawsuits where Jews would sue other Jews and the percentage in lawsuits where Jews would sue other non-Jewish citizens is almost identical (7.64% and 7.83%). The percentage of final verdicts in lawsuits of non-Jewish citizens against Jews is slightly higher (10.52%). As expected, the highest percentage of verdicts is in lawsuits rendered ex officio (27.90%). In most verdicts, the sentence was imprisonment or a fine and the convict often had the right to choose between two options. In addition to some prison sentences and fines, there is also a reference to one penal labour case, several cases of corporal punishments, or cases of public humiliation, which were reached in cases of theft and fornication (e.g., vol. 5, f. 119). In the history of the Dubrovnik Republic, there is only one record to death penalty pronounced to Jewish people. This is the case of a convert named Benvenisti Nasci (Isaac, the son of Abraham) from Ferrara, a cousin of the famous Joseph Nassi, who was sentenced to death in 1571 for murder of a convert Menachem Maraz (vol. 20, ff. 90, 90v). The fonds mostly references to some members of Dubrovnik Jewish families such as Ambonetti, Angeli, Ascoli, Asser, Baraffael, Bueno, Campos, Cohen, Costantini, Fermo, Forte, Janni, Levi, Levi Mandolfo, Luzzena, Maestro, Pardo, Penso, Russo, Terni, Tolentino, Valenzin, Vitali, Volterra.

The lawsuits addressed to the Civil Court and the first statements of plaintiffs, defendants and witnesses were registered in the volumes of the fonds Intentiones Cancellariae (HR-DADU-22). If it was deemed necessary, the Civil Court would continue with the proceedings by hearing prosecutors, defendants, and witnesses. If these were real estate proceedings, the hearings would be then recorded in the books of this fonds, which covers the period from the mid-15th century to the early 19th century. The volumes of this fonds consist of two parts: Stabilia ordinaria and Stabilia extraordinaria. Some proceedings were terminated with a final verdict. The date of the verdict and the page number of the sheet of paper on which the verdict was entered, are noted on the margins of the document. This procedure makes it easier to find the actual judgement in the fonds of the civil court sentences (Sententiae Cancellariae; HR-DADU-18).

There is very little reference to Jewish people in this fonds. Nevertheless, the references found are still significant since, according to these references, Jews also acted asrepresentatives of Christian defendants. For example, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Ruben Vita Ambonetti repeatedly appeared as a representative of a sea captain Bartul Pezer (e.g., vol. 235, ff. 17v-19v).

The fonds contains appeals submitted to the Senate and the Minor Council. According to the data available in volumes 2, 3 and 5, the fonds contains data on appeals accepted by the Senate or the Minor Council. The judgments appealed were mainly in the field of civil law. Other volumes contain very brief information: the date of the decision of the Minor Council or the Senate, the names of the parties in the dispute to whose judgment has been appealed, and the names of judges (consuls) and other civil officials, such as customs officers, who issued the judgment on appeal. The volumes cover the period from the 40s till the 60s of the 15th centuries and from the mid-16th century to the 30s of the 18th century.

There is only a small number of Jews referenced in this fonds. These are mostly members of Jewish families permanently residing in Dubrovnik, such as Abendana, Abuaf, Altarac, Ambonetti, Cabiglio, Cohen, Cohen Camargo, Costantini, Danon, Esperiel, Ferro, Franco, Levi, Luzzena, Maestro, Nahmias, Oef, Pappo, Pardo (i.e., vol. 7, ff. 3v). No further details of verdicts and appeals that were submitted were recorded.

The fonds contains records of confiscations ordered by the Civil Court at the request of the plaintiff. The preserved registers of these decisions were created in the period from the 60s to the beginning of the 19th century. The fonds contains various data on Jewish people, and there are approximately thirty references per volume, which are relevant for the analysis of their business in Dubrovnik. The records primarily reference to confiscations that were made, at the request of Jews, and were ordered by the court to either Jews or Christians. The fonds contains references to some members of Dubrovnik Jewish families such as Baraffael, Campos, Cohen, Costantino, Levi Mandolfo, Luzzena, Pardo, Russo, Terni, Tolentino, Venturra, Vitali. According to the data, money, jewellery, and merchandise were the most confiscated items.

The series contains invitations from consuls (civil law judges) which, at the request of the plaintiff, were addressed to persons (defendants) outside the Dubrovnik Republic. These persons were asked to come to Dubrovnik for a court hearing or a court discussion within a certain period, usually 2 or 3 months. The registers of this series date the 30s of the 15th centuries, and from the period from the beginning of the 17th century till the beginning of the 19th century.

The series contains a small number of records concerning Jews, and the data in the series are relevant for the analysis of the Jewish business network in the Balkans and in the Mediterranean. Some members of Dubrovnik Jewish families are referenced to in the series, as well as some members of Jewish families living in Italian (Ancona) and Ottoman cities (Sofia, Sarajevo). The records show references to the following families: Abeatar, Azubi, Barnathan, Benvenisti, Campos, Coen, Maestro, Oef, Pappo, Pardo, Usiel. For example, in April 1652, at the request of David Maestro, who was Solomon Oef's attorney, the consuls invited Achiva Barnathan from Sofia to come to Dubrovnik within two months' time or to send his representative. He was charged with a debt to the deceased Abraham Oef (vol. 4, ff. 56v, 57).

There are no references to Jewish people in the series.
Criminal cases were initially tried by Curia Maior and Curia Minor and, starting with 1459, by the Criminal Court. Already around 1412, lawsuits began to be filed separately for acts committed outside the city walls. This is how the Lamenta de foris series originated. Each record consists of data on a lawsuit initiated by a private person or the state (ex officio). Witnesses are listed and, if necessary, their written testimonies are also added. The records in this series date from the period of the 70s in the 14th century to the end of the 16th century. The records relate to acts committed outside the city walls, as well as those committed outside the territory of the Dubrovnik Republic (if the victim or the perpetrator was a citizen of the Republic). Unlike the records for crimes committed inside the city walls, in the records of the fonds Lamenta de foris crimes such as theft and other property crimes prevail.

There is no reference to Jewish people in the series.
The series contains registers with expenses related to obtaining fermans issued to Dubrovnik sea captains for safe navigation on the Adriatic. The registers also contain the names of the captains to whom these fermans were issued.

There are no references to Jewish people in the series.
The service of syndics, state officials for the supervision of offices that provided services for locals, was introduced in the 15th century. These officials would visit the area of Dubrovnik every spring to handle complaints from the population and investigate ex officio any issue they would consider relevant and necessary to solve. Upon their return, they were required to compile a report and submit this report to the Senate. The volumes of this series contain records made by syndics beginning in 1545.

There are no references to Jewish people in the series.

The series consists of transcripts and translations of rulers’ charters and various other documents. These documents are mainly issued by Ottoman sultans. Other documents in the fonds are issued by the rulers of some states such as Spain or Hungary and the Papal States.

The Republic of Dubrovnik bordered the Herzegovinian Sancak along the entire border, and Sancak was a part of the Bosnian Eyalet. Since Herzegovinian sancakbeys and Bosnian beylerbeys were Dubrovnik's closest neighbours, Dubrovnik authorities sought to maintain as close relations as possible with them. Ragusan ambassadors often visited these dignitaries, and abundant correspondence between them has been preserved till today. The letters of Herzegovinian sancakbeys and the Bosnian beylerbeys reveal, among other things, which problems were to be resolved between the Republic and the Ottoman Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. In addition to problems in the field of trade, customs duties, and food procurement in the Bosnian area for the needs of the Republic, there were other issues that were often referenced to in these documents such as robberies, thefts, injuries and murders, which had been most often committed by Ottoman subjects against peasants living in border villages of the Dubrovnik Republic. Herzegovinian sancakbeys and the Bosnian beylerbeys often addressed the authorities of the Republic with various requests. The data thus show that they would be looking for a physician, construction workers, food for the needs of their courts, or just for help in organizing overseas trips for their people. Most of the documents of this subseries are not dated.

There are not many references to Jews in this subseries, and these can be found in approximately fifteen letters. In most cases, these references concern debts, and, in these letters, Jews appear both as debtors and as creditors. For example, Samuel Ambonetti and Hai Tolentino were debtors of many Ottoman subjects (Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Kukavica, no. 36, 207, 211, 226; B 11, no. 9, 23. Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Silahdar, no. 328; CT 2, no. 92 Beylerbey Süleyman Pasha Bostanci, No. 269. Sancakbey Ali Pasha Cengic, B 23, No. 9. Sancakbey Musli Pasha, B 23, No. 34). The remaining letters deal with several trade disputes, as well as the abduction of a servant of a Jew from Sarajevo (Beylerbey Ahmed Pasha Seydi, no. 997. Beylerbey Abu Bekir Pasha, no. 398. Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Silahdar, no. 238).