COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal Matters Cable Operations Litigation Marchese, et al. v. Cablevision Systems Corporation and CSC Holdings, LLC: The Company is a defendant in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey by several present and former Cablevision subscribers, purportedly on behalf of a class of iO video subscribers in New Jersey, Connecticut and New York. After three versions of the complaint were dismissed without prejudice by the District Court, plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint on August 22, 2011, alleging that the Company violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by allegedly tying the sale of interactive services offered as part of iO television packages to the rental and use of set-top boxes distributed by Cablevision, and violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by allegedly seeking to monopolize the distribution of Cablevision compatible set-top boxes. Plaintiffs seek unspecified treble monetary damages, attorney's fees, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. On September 23, 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the third amended complaint. On January 10, 2012, the District Court issued a decision dismissing with prejudice the Section 2 monopolization claim, but allowing the Section 1 tying claim and related state common law claims to proceed. Cablevision's answer to the third amended complaint was filed on February 13, 2012. On December 7, 2015, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, which is subject to approval by the Court. On December 11, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, conditional certification of the settlement class, and approval of a class notice distribution plan. On March 10, 2016 the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and approved the class notice distribution plan. Distribution of class notice is proceeding. The final approval hearing on the settlement is scheduled for September 12, 2016. In the quarter ended September 30, 2015, the Company recorded estimated charges associated with the settlement totaling $12,800, of which $9,500 is reflected in selling, general and administrative expense, and $3,300, representing the cost of benefits to class members that are reasonably expected to be provided, is reflected as a reduction to revenue, net. It is possible that the amount ultimately paid in connection with the settlement could exceed the amount recorded. In re Cablevision Consumer Litigation: Following expiration of the affiliation agreements for carriage of certain Fox broadcast stations and cable networks on October 16, 2010, News Corporation terminated delivery of the programming feeds to the Company, and as a result, those stations and networks were unavailable on the Company's cable television systems. On October 30, 2010, the Company and Fox reached an agreement on new affiliation agreements for these stations and networks, and carriage was restored. Several purported class action lawsuits were subsequently filed on behalf of the Company's customers seeking recovery for the lack of Fox programming. Those lawsuits were consolidated in an action before the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and a consolidated complaint was filed in that court on February 22, 2011. Plaintiffs asserted claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and consumer fraud, seeking unspecified compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorneys' fees. On March 28, 2012, the Court ruled on the Company's motion to dismiss, denying the motion with regard to plaintiffs' breach of contract claim, but granting it with regard to the remaining claims, which were dismissed. On April 16, 2012, plaintiffs filed a second consolidated amended complaint, which asserts a claim only for breach of contract. The Company's answer was filed on May 2, 2012. On October 10, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification and on December 13, 2012, a motion for partial summary judgment. On March 31, 2014, the Court granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification, and denied without prejudice plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. On May 30, 2014, the Court approved the form of class notice, and on October 7, 2014, approved the class notice distribution plan. The class notice distribution has been completed, and the opt-out period expired on February 27, 2015. Expert discovery commenced on May 5, 2014, and concluded on December 8 and 28, 2015, when the Court ruled on the pending expert discovery motions. On January 26, 2016, the Court approved a schedule for filing of summary judgment motions. Pursuant to the Court’s order, plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on March 31, 2016, and the Company sought leave of Court to file its own summary judgment motion. The Company believes that this claim is without merit and intends to defend these lawsuits vigorously, but is unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss. Patent Litigation Cablevision is named as a defendant in certain lawsuits claiming infringement of various patents relating to various aspects of the Company's businesses. In certain of these cases other industry participants are also defendants. In certain of these cases the Company expects that any potential liability would be the responsibility of the Company's equipment vendors pursuant to applicable contractual indemnification provisions. The Company believes that the claims are without merit and intends to defend the actions vigorously, but is unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss. Other Litigation In April 2011, Thomas C. Dolan, a director and Executive Vice President, Strategy and Development, in the Office of the Chairman at Cablevision, filed a lawsuit against Cablevision and Rainbow Media Holdings LLC (which was subsequently dismissed as a party) in New York State Supreme Court. The lawsuit raises compensation-related claims related to events largely from 2005 to 2008. The matter was handled under the direction of an independent committee of the Board of Directors of Cablevision. In April 2015, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on liability, with damages to be determined. On June 18, 2015, the Company filed a notice of appeal. As previously disclosed, on February 8, 2016, Cablevision and Thomas C. Dolan entered into a settlement pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay plaintiff $21,000 and plaintiff released all claims. A stipulation of dismissal with prejudice was approved and entered by the Court on February 8, 2016, and payment was made the same day. The appeal has also been withdrawn. As previously disclosed, in connection with the settlement, Charles F. Dolan and James L. Dolan have entered into an agreement to pay the Company, in the aggregate, $6,000 in partial reimbursement of the Company's settlement payment to Thomas C. Dolan if the Company's pending merger with Altice is not consummated. In addition to the matters discussed above, the Company is party to various lawsuits, some involving claims for substantial damages. Although the outcome of these other matters cannot be predicted and the impact of the final resolution of these other matters on the Company's results of operations in a particular subsequent reporting period is not known, management does not believe that the resolution of these other lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on the financial position of the Company or the ability of the Company to meet its financial obligations as they become due.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal Matters

Cable Operations Litigation

Marchese, et al. v. Cablevision Systems Corporation and CSC Holdings, LLC: The Company is a defendant in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey by several present and former Cablevision subscribers, purportedly on behalf of a class of iO video subscribers in New Jersey, Connecticut and New York. After three versions of the complaint were dismissed without prejudice by the District Court, plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint on August 22, 2011, alleging that the Company violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by allegedly tying the sale of interactive services offered as part of iO television packages to the rental and use of set-top boxes distributed by Cablevision, and violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by allegedly seeking to monopolize the distribution of Cablevision compatible set-top boxes. Plaintiffs seek unspecified treble monetary damages, attorney's fees, as well as injunctive and declaratory relief. On September 23, 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the third amended complaint. On January 10, 2012, the District Court issued a decision dismissing with prejudice the Section 2 monopolization claim, but allowing the Section 1 tying claim and related state common law claims to proceed. Cablevision's answer to the third amended complaint was filed on February 13, 2012. On December 7, 2015, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, which is subject to approval by the Court. On December 11, 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, conditional certification of the settlement class, and approval of a class notice distribution plan. On March 10, 2016 the Court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and approved the class notice distribution plan. Distribution of class notice is proceeding. The final approval hearing on the settlement is scheduled for September 12, 2016. In the quarter ended September 30, 2015, the Company recorded estimated charges associated with the settlement totaling $12,800, of which $9,500 is reflected in selling, general and administrative expense, and $3,300, representing the cost of benefits to class members that are reasonably expected to be provided, is reflected as a reduction to revenue, net. It is possible that the amount ultimately paid in connection with the settlement could exceed the amount recorded.

In re Cablevision Consumer Litigation: Following expiration of the affiliation agreements for carriage of certain Fox broadcast stations and cable networks on October 16, 2010, News Corporation terminated delivery of the programming feeds to the Company, and as a result, those stations and networks were unavailable on the Company's cable television systems. On October 30, 2010, the Company and Fox reached an agreement on new affiliation agreements for these stations and networks, and carriage was restored. Several purported class action lawsuits were subsequently filed on behalf of the Company's customers seeking recovery for the lack of Fox programming. Those lawsuits were consolidated in an action before the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and a consolidated complaint was filed in that court on February 22, 2011. Plaintiffs asserted claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and consumer fraud, seeking unspecified compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorneys' fees. On March 28, 2012, the Court ruled on the Company's motion to dismiss, denying the motion with regard to plaintiffs' breach of contract claim, but granting it with regard to the remaining claims, which were dismissed. On April 16, 2012, plaintiffs filed a second consolidated amended complaint, which asserts a claim only for breach of contract. The Company's answer was filed on May 2, 2012. On October 10, 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification and on December 13, 2012, a motion for partial summary judgment. On March 31, 2014, the Court granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification, and denied without prejudice plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. On May 30, 2014, the Court approved the form of class notice, and on October 7, 2014, approved the class notice distribution plan. The class notice distribution has been completed, and the opt-out period expired on February 27, 2015. Expert discovery commenced on May 5, 2014, and concluded on December 8 and 28, 2015, when the Court ruled on the pending expert discovery motions. On January 26, 2016, the Court approved a schedule for filing of summary judgment motions. Pursuant to the Court’s order, plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on March 31, 2016, and the Company sought leave of Court to file its own summary judgment motion. The Company believes that this claim is without merit and intends to defend these lawsuits vigorously, but is unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss.

Patent Litigation

Cablevision is named as a defendant in certain lawsuits claiming infringement of various patents relating to various aspects of the Company's businesses. In certain of these cases other industry participants are also defendants. In certain of these cases the Company expects that any potential liability would be the responsibility of the Company's equipment vendors pursuant to applicable contractual indemnification provisions. The Company believes that the claims are without merit and intends to defend the actions vigorously, but is unable to predict the outcome of these lawsuits or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss.

Other Litigation

In April 2011, Thomas C. Dolan, a director and Executive Vice President, Strategy and Development, in the Office of the Chairman at Cablevision, filed a lawsuit against Cablevision and Rainbow Media Holdings LLC (which was subsequently dismissed as a party) in New York State Supreme Court. The lawsuit raises compensation-related claims related to events largely from 2005 to 2008. The matter was handled under the direction of an independent committee of the Board of Directors of Cablevision. In April 2015, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on liability, with damages to be determined. On June 18, 2015, the Company filed a notice of appeal. As previously disclosed, on February 8, 2016, Cablevision and Thomas C. Dolan entered into a settlement pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay plaintiff $21,000 and plaintiff released all claims. A stipulation of dismissal with prejudice was approved and entered by the Court on February 8, 2016, and payment was made the same day. The appeal has also been withdrawn. As previously disclosed, in connection with the settlement, Charles F. Dolan and James L. Dolan have entered into an agreement to pay the Company, in the aggregate, $6,000 in partial reimbursement of the Company's settlement payment to Thomas C. Dolan if the Company's pending merger with Altice is not consummated.

In addition to the matters discussed above, the Company is party to various lawsuits, some involving claims for substantial damages. Although the outcome of these other matters cannot be predicted and the impact of the final resolution of these other matters on the Company's results of operations in a particular subsequent reporting period is not known, management does not believe that the resolution of these other lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on the financial position of the Company or the ability of the Company to meet its financial obligations as they become due.