Commitments and Contingencies (Notes)	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]	Commitments and Contingencies Insurance Loss Reserves We purchase comprehensive general liability, morticians’ and cemetery professional liability, automobile liability, and workers’ compensation insurance coverage structured with high deductibles. The high-deductible insurance program means we are primarily self-insured for claims and associated costs and losses covered by these policies. As of March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have self-insurance reserves of $80.0 million and $78.0 million, respectively. Litigation We are a party to various litigation matters, investigations, and proceedings. For each of our outstanding legal matters, we evaluate the merits of the case, our exposure to the matter, possible legal or settlement strategies, and the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in the lawsuits described herein; however, if we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and can be reasonably estimated, we establish the necessary accruals. We hold certain insurance policies that may reduce cash outflows with respect to an adverse outcome of certain of these litigation matters. We accrue such insurance recoveries when they become probable of being paid and can be reasonably estimated. Burial Practices Claims. We are named as a defendant in various lawsuits alleging improper burial practices at certain of our cemetery locations. These lawsuits include but are not limited to the Scott and Schwartz lawsuits described in the following paragraphs. Robert Scott, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Eden Memorial Park, et al. (previously styled F. Charles Sands, et al. v. Eden Memorial Park, et al.) Case No. BC421528; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles - Central District. This case was filed in September 2009 against SCI and certain subsidiaries regarding our Eden Memorial Park cemetery in Mission Hills, California. The plaintiff seeks compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages as well as the appointment of a receiver to oversee cemetery operations. The plaintiff alleges the cemetery engaged in wrongful burial practices and did not disclose them to customers. After a hearing in February 2012, the court in May 2012 issued an order certifying classes of cemetery plot owners and their families based on alleged Company misrepresentation, concealment or nondisclosure of material facts regarding alleged improper burial practices pertaining to the period from February 1985 to September 2009. Trial proceedings commenced in January 2014. On February 27, 2014, the Company announced a settlement of the lawsuit and the trial court preliminarily approved the settlement agreement. All claims under the lawsuit will be released if final court approval of the settlement is obtained. The terms of the settlement call for the establishment of a settlement fund of $35,250,000, to which various SCI insurance carriers will contribute $25,250,000 and the Company will contribute the balance. Other provisions call for, among other things, the Company to contribute up to $250,000 toward claims administration costs and take certain actions in performing future burials. In addition, the Company reserves the right to cancel the settlement in the event a certain number of class members opt out of the settlement. The trial court is scheduled to conduct a hearing on May 15, 2014 to consider the final approval of the settlement. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of any damages. Barbara Schwartz & Carol Neitlich, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc., et al.; Case No. 2012CA015954, In the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. This lawsuit has been removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and is now Case No. 9:12-CV-80180-DMM. This case was filed by counsel for plaintiffs in the Sands case regarding our Star of David Memorial Gardens Cemetery and Funeral Chapel and Bailey Memorial Gardens located in North Lauderdale, Florida. Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of cemetery plot owners and their families. Plaintiffs allege the cemetery engaged in wrongful burial practices and did not disclose them to customers. Plaintiffs seek compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages as well as the appointment of a receiver to oversee the cemetery operations. On our motion, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims in March 2013. The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal. On February 5, 2014, the 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of any damages. Wage and Hour Claims. We are named a defendant in various lawsuits alleging violations of federal and state laws regulating wage and hour overtime pay, including but not limited to the Bryant and Helm lawsuits described below. Bryant, et al. v. Service Corporation International, et al.; Case No. RG-07359593; and Helm, et al. v. AWGI & SCI; Case No. RG-07359602; in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda. These cases were filed on December 5, 2007. These cases were removed to federal court in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco/Oakland Division. The Bryant case is now Case No. 3:08-CV-01190-SI and the Helm case is now Case No. C 08-01184-SI. On December 29, 2009, the court in the Helm case denied the plaintiffs’ motion to certify the case as a class action. The plaintiffs modified and refiled their motion for certification. On March 9, 2011, the court denied plaintiffs’ renewed motions to certify a class in both of the Bryant and Helm cases and dismissed the Helm case. The Helm plaintiff is appealing the court's order decertifying her claims. The individual claims in the Bryant case are still pending. The plaintiffs have also (i) filed additional lawsuits with similar allegations seeking class certification of state law claims in different states, and (ii) made a large number of demands for arbitration. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, in these lawsuits. Claims Regarding Acquisition of Stewart Enterprises. We are named as a defendant in the following lawsuit. Karen Moulton, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Stewart Enterprises, Inc., Service Corporation International and others ; Case No. 2013-5636; in the Civil District Court Parish of New Orleans. This case was filed as a class action in June 2013 against SCI and our subsidiary in connection with SCI's acquisition of Stewart Enterprises, Inc. The plaintiffs allege that SCI aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Stewart Enterprises and its board of directors in negotiating the combination of Stewart Enterprises with a subsidiary of SCI. The plaintiffs seek damages concerning the combination. We have filed exceptions to the plaintiffs’ complaint that are set for oral hearing on June 12, 2014. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of damages. The ultimate outcome of the matters described above cannot be determined at this time. We intend to vigorously defend all of the above lawsuits; however, an adverse decision in one or more of such matters could have a material effect on us, our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Commitments and Contingencies

Insurance Loss Reserves

We purchase comprehensive general liability, morticians’ and cemetery professional liability, automobile liability, and workers’ compensation insurance coverage structured with high deductibles. The high-deductible insurance program means we are primarily self-insured for claims and associated costs and losses covered by these policies. As of March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have self-insurance reserves of $80.0 million and $78.0 million, respectively.

Litigation

We are a party to various litigation matters, investigations, and proceedings. For each of our outstanding legal matters, we evaluate the merits of the case, our exposure to the matter, possible legal or settlement strategies, and the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in the lawsuits described herein; however, if we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and can be reasonably estimated, we establish the necessary accruals. We hold certain insurance policies that may reduce cash outflows with respect to an adverse outcome of certain of these litigation matters. We accrue such insurance recoveries when they become probable of being paid and can be reasonably estimated.

Burial Practices Claims. We are named as a defendant in various lawsuits alleging improper burial practices at certain of our cemetery locations. These lawsuits include but are not limited to the Scott and Schwartz lawsuits described in the following paragraphs.

Robert Scott, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Eden Memorial Park, et al. (previously styled F. Charles Sands, et al. v. Eden Memorial Park, et al.) Case No. BC421528; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles - Central District. This case was filed in September 2009 against SCI and certain subsidiaries regarding our Eden Memorial Park cemetery in Mission Hills, California. The plaintiff seeks compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages as well as the appointment of a receiver to oversee cemetery operations. The plaintiff alleges the cemetery engaged in wrongful burial practices and did not disclose them to customers. After a hearing in February 2012, the court in May 2012 issued an order certifying classes of cemetery plot owners and their families based on alleged Company misrepresentation, concealment or nondisclosure of material facts regarding alleged improper burial practices pertaining to the period from February 1985 to September 2009. Trial proceedings commenced in January 2014. On February 27, 2014, the Company announced a settlement of the lawsuit and the trial court preliminarily approved the settlement agreement. All claims under the lawsuit will be released if final court approval of the settlement is obtained. The terms of the settlement call for the establishment of a settlement fund of $35,250,000, to which various SCI insurance carriers will contribute $25,250,000 and the Company will contribute the balance. Other provisions call for, among other things, the Company to contribute up to $250,000 toward claims administration costs and take certain actions in performing future burials. In addition, the Company reserves the right to cancel the settlement in the event a certain number of class members opt out of the settlement. The trial court is scheduled to conduct a hearing on May 15, 2014 to consider the final approval of the settlement. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of any damages.

Barbara Schwartz & Carol Neitlich, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc., et al.; Case No. 2012CA015954, In the Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial District in and for Palm Beach County, Florida. This lawsuit has been removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and is now Case No. 9:12-CV-80180-DMM. This case was filed by counsel for plaintiffs in the Sands case regarding our Star of David Memorial Gardens Cemetery and Funeral Chapel and Bailey Memorial Gardens located in North Lauderdale, Florida. Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of cemetery plot owners and their families. Plaintiffs allege the cemetery engaged in wrongful burial practices and did not disclose them to customers. Plaintiffs seek compensatory, consequential, and punitive damages as well as the appointment of a receiver to oversee the cemetery operations. On our motion, the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims in March 2013. The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal. On February 5, 2014, the 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of any damages.

Wage and Hour Claims. We are named a defendant in various lawsuits alleging violations of federal and state laws regulating wage and hour overtime pay, including but not limited to the Bryant and Helm lawsuits described below.

Bryant, et al. v. Service Corporation International, et al.; Case No. RG-07359593; and Helm, et al. v. AWGI & SCI; Case No. RG-07359602; in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda. These cases were filed on December 5, 2007. These cases were removed to federal court in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco/Oakland Division. The Bryant case is now Case No. 3:08-CV-01190-SI and the Helm case is now Case No. C 08-01184-SI. On December 29, 2009, the court in the Helm case denied the plaintiffs’ motion to certify the case as a class action. The plaintiffs modified and refiled their motion for certification. On March 9, 2011, the court denied plaintiffs’ renewed motions to certify a class in both of the Bryant and Helm cases and dismissed the Helm case. The Helm plaintiff is appealing the court's order decertifying her claims. The individual claims in the Bryant case are still pending. The plaintiffs have also (i) filed additional lawsuits with similar allegations seeking class certification of state law claims in different states, and (ii) made a large number of demands for arbitration. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, in these lawsuits.

Claims Regarding Acquisition of Stewart Enterprises. We are named as a defendant in the following lawsuit.

Karen Moulton, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Stewart Enterprises, Inc., Service Corporation International and others ; Case No. 2013-5636; in the Civil District Court Parish of New Orleans. This case was filed as a class action in June 2013 against SCI and our subsidiary in connection with SCI's acquisition of Stewart Enterprises, Inc. The plaintiffs allege that SCI aided and abetted breaches of fiduciary duties by Stewart Enterprises and its board of directors in negotiating the combination of Stewart Enterprises with a subsidiary of SCI. The plaintiffs seek damages concerning the combination. We have filed exceptions to the plaintiffs’ complaint that are set for oral hearing on June 12, 2014. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of damages.

The ultimate outcome of the matters described above cannot be determined at this time. We intend to vigorously defend all of the above lawsuits; however, an adverse decision in one or more of such matters could have a material effect on us, our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.