Contingency	12 Months Ended
Feb. 29, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingency	NOTE 16 – CONTINGENCY The Corporation is presently involved in various judicial, administrative, and regulatory proceedings concerning matters arising in the ordinary course of business, including but not limited to, employment and commercial disputes and purported class action litigation. These matters are inherently subject to many uncertainties regarding the possibility of a loss to the Corporation. These uncertainties will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, confirming the incurrence of a liability or reduction of a liability. In accordance with ASC Topic 450, “Contingencies,” the Corporation accrues for these contingencies by a charge to income when it is both probable that one or more future events will occur confirming the fact of a loss and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. This accrual is included in “Accrued liabilities” on the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. Due to this uncertainty, the actual amount of any loss may ultimately prove to be larger or smaller than the amounts reflected in the Corporation’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Some of these proceedings are at preliminary stages and some of these cases seek an indeterminate amount of damages. Al Smith et al. v. American Greetings Corporation. On June 4, 2014, Al Smith and Jeffrey Hourcade, former fixture installation crew members for special projects, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, filed a putative class action lawsuit against American Greetings Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. Plaintiffs claim that the Corporation violated certain rules under the Fair Labor Standards Act and California law, including the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. For themselves and the proposed classes, plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of general and special damages, including but not limited to minimum wages, agreed upon wages and overtime wages, statutory liquidated damages, statutory penalties (including penalties under the California Labor Code Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), unpaid benefits, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and interest). In addition, plaintiffs request disgorgement of all funds the Corporation acquired by means of any act or practice that constitutes unfair competition and restoration of such funds to the plaintiffs and the proposed classes. On November 6, 2014, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint to add claims for reimbursement of business expenses and failure to provide meal periods in violation of California Law and on December 12, 2014, amended their PAGA notice to include the newly added claims. On January 20, 2015, the parties reached a settlement in principle that, once approved by the Court, would fully and finally resolve the claims brought by Smith and Hourcade, as well as the classes they sought to represent. The settlement was a product of extensive negotiations and a private mediation, which was finalized and memorialized in a Stipulation and Class Action Settlement Agreement signed March 30, 2015. On March 31, 2015, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and on July 23, 2015, the Court entered its Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. On August 24, 2015, the claims administrator commenced mailing of notice and claim forms to class members and the claims closed October 24, 2015. On October 14, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for final approval of the class settlement, together with their motion for approval of incentive payments to the Named Plaintiffs and attorneys’ fees. The Court held a final approval hearing on December 17, 2015. On May 19, 2016, the Court entered an Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement; Granting in Part Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Class Representatives’ Service Payments. The Court-approved settlement establishes a settlement fund of $4,000 to pay claims from current and former employees who worked at least one day for American Greetings Corporation and/or certain of its subsidiaries in any hourly non-exempt position in California between June 4, 2010 and July 23, 2015. American Greetings will fund the settlement within twenty (20) days after passage of all appeal periods. Thereafter, the settlement funds will be disbursed as provided in the settlement agreement and the Court’s final approval order. Michael Ackerman v. American Greetings Corporation, et al. On March 6, 2015, plaintiff Michael Ackerman, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court of New Jersey alleging violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by American Greetings Corporation and its subsidiary, AG Interactive, Inc. The plaintiff claims that defendants (1) sent plaintiff an unsolicited text message notifying plaintiff that he had received an ecard; and (2) knowingly and/or willfully violated the TCPA, which prohibits unsolicited automated or prerecorded telephone calls, including faxes and text messages, sent to cellular telephones. Plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class based on unsolicited text messages sent by defendants during the period February 8, 2011 through February 8, 2015. The plaintiff seeks damages in the statutory amount of five-hundred dollars for each and every violation of the TCPA and one-thousand five-hundred dollars for each and every willful violation of the TCPA. The Corporation believes the plaintiff’s allegations in this lawsuit are without merit and intends to defend the action vigorously. With respect to the Ackerman case, management is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses as (i) the aggregate damages have not been specified, (ii) the proceeding is in the early stages, (iii) there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending and anticipated motions, and/or (iv) there are significant factual issues to be resolved. However, management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcome of this proceeding will have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations, although the outcome could be material to the Corporation’s operating results for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period.

NOTE 16 – CONTINGENCY

The Corporation is presently involved in various judicial, administrative, and regulatory proceedings concerning matters arising in the ordinary course of business, including but not limited to, employment and commercial disputes and purported class action litigation. These matters are inherently subject to many uncertainties regarding the possibility of a loss to the Corporation. These uncertainties will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, confirming the incurrence of a liability or reduction of a liability. In accordance with ASC Topic 450, “Contingencies,” the Corporation accrues for these contingencies by a charge to income when it is both probable that one or more future events will occur confirming the fact of a loss and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. This accrual is included in “Accrued liabilities” on the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. Due to this uncertainty, the actual amount of any loss may ultimately prove to be larger or smaller than the amounts reflected in the Corporation’s Consolidated Financial Statements. Some of these proceedings are at preliminary stages and some of these cases seek an indeterminate amount of damages.

Al Smith et al. v. American Greetings Corporation. On June 4, 2014, Al Smith and Jeffrey Hourcade, former fixture installation crew members for special projects, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, filed a putative class action lawsuit against American Greetings Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. Plaintiffs claim that the Corporation violated certain rules under the Fair Labor Standards Act and California law, including the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. For themselves and the proposed classes, plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of general and special damages, including but not limited to minimum wages, agreed upon wages and overtime wages, statutory liquidated damages, statutory penalties (including penalties under the California Labor Code Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), unpaid benefits, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and interest). In addition, plaintiffs request disgorgement of all funds the Corporation acquired by means of any act or practice that constitutes unfair competition and restoration of such funds to the plaintiffs and the proposed classes. On November 6, 2014, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint to add claims for reimbursement of business expenses and failure to provide meal periods in violation of California Law and on December 12, 2014, amended their PAGA notice to include the newly added claims.

On January 20, 2015, the parties reached a settlement in principle that, once approved by the Court, would fully and finally resolve the claims brought by Smith and Hourcade, as well as the classes they sought to represent. The settlement was a product of extensive negotiations and a private mediation, which was finalized and memorialized in a Stipulation and Class Action Settlement Agreement signed March 30, 2015. On March 31, 2015, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and on July 23, 2015, the Court entered its Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. On August 24, 2015, the claims administrator commenced mailing of notice and claim forms to class members and the claims closed October 24, 2015. On October 14, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for final approval of the class settlement, together with their motion for approval of incentive payments to the Named Plaintiffs and attorneys’ fees. The Court held a final approval hearing on December 17, 2015. On May 19, 2016, the Court entered an Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement; Granting in Part Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs and Class Representatives’ Service Payments.

The Court-approved settlement establishes a settlement fund of $4,000 to pay claims from current and former employees who worked at least one day for American Greetings Corporation and/or certain of its subsidiaries in any hourly non-exempt position in California between June 4, 2010 and July 23, 2015. American Greetings will fund the settlement within twenty (20) days after passage of all appeal periods. Thereafter, the settlement funds will be disbursed as provided in the settlement agreement and the Court’s final approval order.

Michael Ackerman v. American Greetings Corporation, et al. On March 6, 2015, plaintiff Michael Ackerman, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, filed a putative class action lawsuit in the United States District Court of New Jersey alleging violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by American Greetings Corporation and its subsidiary, AG Interactive, Inc. The plaintiff claims that defendants (1) sent plaintiff an unsolicited text message notifying plaintiff that he had received an ecard; and (2) knowingly and/or willfully violated the TCPA, which prohibits unsolicited automated or prerecorded telephone calls, including faxes and text messages, sent to cellular telephones. Plaintiff seeks to certify a nationwide class based on unsolicited text messages sent by defendants during the period February 8, 2011 through February 8, 2015. The plaintiff seeks damages in the statutory amount of five-hundred dollars for each and every violation of the TCPA and one-thousand five-hundred dollars for each and every willful violation of the TCPA. The Corporation believes the plaintiff’s allegations in this lawsuit are without merit and intends to defend the action vigorously.

With respect to the Ackerman case, management is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses as (i) the aggregate damages have not been specified, (ii) the proceeding is in the early stages, (iii) there is uncertainty as to the outcome of pending and anticipated motions, and/or (iv) there are significant factual issues to be resolved. However, management does not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcome of this proceeding will have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s business, consolidated financial position or results of operations, although the outcome could be material to the Corporation’s operating results for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period.