Commitments and Contingencies (Notes)	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure	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 September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have self-insurance reserves of $76.2 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. 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, Helm, and Samborsky 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 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. In October 2014, we settled claims of certain individuals in these cases for an amount which is not material to SCI, and we expect these cases to be dismissed. Accordingly, we consider this matter to be closed. Charles Samborsky, et al, individually and on behalf of those persons similarly situated, v. SCI California Funeral Services, Inc., et al ; Case No. BC544180; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Central District-Central Civil West Courthouse. This lawsuit was filed in April 2014 against an SCI subsidiary and purports to have been brought on behalf of employees who worked as family service counselors in California since April 2010. The plaintiffs allege causes of action for various violations of state laws regulating wage and hour pay. The plaintiffs seek unpaid wages, compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, interest, and injunctive relief. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, in this lawsuit. Claims Regarding Acquisition of Stewart Enterprises. We are involved in the following lawsuits. 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 filed exceptions to the plaintiffs’ complaint that were granted in June 2014. Thus, subject to appeals, SCI will no longer be a party to the suit. The case will continue against our subsidiary Stewart Enterprises and its former individual directors. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of damages. S.E. Funeral Homes of California, Inc. v. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles, et al.; Case No. BC559142; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff is a company indirectly owned by Stewart Enterprises, Inc. The plaintiff filed this action in September 2014 to prevent The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles (the “Archdiocese”) from terminating six ground leases. In reliance on the leases having 40 year terms beginning at the earliest in 1997, the plaintiff had previously made material investments since 1997 in constructing and operating funeral homes, chapels, mausoleums, and other improvements on the leased premises. In addition, the plaintiff has created a material backlog of deferred preneed revenue that plaintiff expects to receive in the coming years. In September 2014, the Archdiocese delivered notices purporting to terminate the leases and alleging that the leases were breached because the plaintiff did not obtain the Archdiocese’s consent before Stewart Enterprises, Inc. entered into a reverse merger with an affiliate of SCI. The plaintiff disputes this contention and seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment declaring that the Archdiocese’s purported termination notices are invalid, requiring specific performance of the leases, or, in the alternative, awarding plaintiff compensatory damages and damages for unjust enrichment. We cannot quantify the ultimate outcome in this lawsuit. 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 September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have self-insurance reserves of $76.2 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.

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, Helm, and Samborsky 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 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. In October 2014, we settled claims of certain individuals in these cases for an amount which is not material to SCI, and we expect these cases to be dismissed. Accordingly, we consider this matter to be closed.

Charles Samborsky, et al, individually and on behalf of those persons similarly situated, v. SCI California Funeral Services, Inc., et al ; Case No. BC544180; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Central District-Central Civil West Courthouse. This lawsuit was filed in April 2014 against an SCI subsidiary and purports to have been brought on behalf of employees who worked as family service counselors in California since April 2010. The plaintiffs allege causes of action for various violations of state laws regulating wage and hour pay. The plaintiffs seek unpaid wages, compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, interest, and injunctive relief. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, in this lawsuit.

Claims Regarding Acquisition of Stewart Enterprises. We are involved in the following lawsuits.

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 filed exceptions to the plaintiffs’ complaint that were granted in June 2014. Thus, subject to appeals, SCI will no longer be a party to the suit. The case will continue against our subsidiary Stewart Enterprises and its former individual directors. We cannot quantify our ultimate liability, if any, for the payment of damages.

S.E. Funeral Homes of California, Inc. v. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles, et al.; Case No. BC559142; in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles. The plaintiff is a company indirectly owned by Stewart Enterprises, Inc. The plaintiff filed this action in September 2014 to prevent The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Los Angeles (the “Archdiocese”) from terminating six ground leases. In reliance on the leases having 40 year terms beginning at the earliest in 1997, the plaintiff had previously made material investments since 1997 in constructing and operating funeral homes, chapels, mausoleums, and other improvements on the leased premises. In addition, the plaintiff has created a material backlog of deferred preneed revenue that plaintiff expects to receive in the coming years. In September 2014, the Archdiocese delivered notices purporting to terminate the leases and alleging that the leases were breached because the plaintiff did not obtain the Archdiocese’s consent before Stewart Enterprises, Inc. entered into a reverse merger with an affiliate of SCI. The plaintiff disputes this contention and seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment declaring that the Archdiocese’s purported termination notices are invalid, requiring specific performance of the leases, or, in the alternative, awarding plaintiff compensatory damages and damages for unjust enrichment. We cannot quantify the ultimate outcome in this lawsuit.

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.