Due to Parent	12 Months Ended
Oct. 31, 2015
Related Party Transactions [Abstract]
Due to Parent	Note 6 - Related Parties Litigation with AFH Advisory and Amir F. Heshmatpour Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. AFH Advisory is presently a plaintiff and a counterclaim defendant in a matter that is pending in both Delaware Superior Court (Index No. N12C-09-045-MMJ [CCLD]) and Delaware Chancery Court (Index No. C.A. No. 8005-JJ). AFH Advisory brought the suit against Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. ("Emmaus") in regards to Emmaus' attempt to cancel AFH Advisory's ownership interest in Emmaus, and its refusal to reimburse AFH Advisory for expenses relating to a reverse merger. Emmaus has brought counterclaims against AFH Advisory for a declaratory judgment canceling AFH Advisory's ownership interest in Emmaus, fraud, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. All parties completed document discovery and filed motions for summary judgment. Emmaus' motion for partial summary judgment was granted by the Court, which held that the Third Letter of Intent ("LOI III") between AFH Advisory and Emmaus was terminated, the public offering contemplated by LOI III was terminated, the advisor shares Emmaus gave to AFH Advisory and its affiliates pursuant to the terms of LOI III had been canceled, and that AFH and its affiliated must return all Emmaus shares in their possession. The partial summary judgment motion brought by individual counterclaim defendant Amir Heshmatpour, and joined in by AFH Advisory, was granted in part by the Court, which held that Emmaus was not entitled to compensatory damages on its fraud and fraud in the inducement claims. Following the Court's decision on these summary judgment motions, AFH Advisory does not have any remaining claims against Emmaus. Emmaus continues to maintain claims against AFH Advisory for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment. AFH Advisory has asserted defenses for these remaining claims, and it is defending this matter. On April 7, 2015, a settlement of all claims was reached between the parties whereby AFH Advisory agreed to transfer publicly traded securities of one of AFH’s portfolio companies to Emmaus with a current trading value of $30,000. Emerald Dairy, Inc. AFH Advisory and other entities brought a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County against Emerald Dairy, Inc. (“Emerald”) and its Chairman, Mr. Shan, asserting that they were entitled to a large number of shares of Emerald, both from Emerald and from shares individually owned, and pledged, by Chairman Shan. Emerald and Chairman Shang defaulted. On March 27, 2015, a default judgment was issued by the Superior Court of California in favor of AFH Advisory in the amount of $1,132,181 which includes damages of $897,121, prejudgment interest of $224,260, and attorney fees of $10,800. Banner Bank Judgment Mr. Amir Heshmatpour is a defendant in two lawsuits related to Banner Bank which have been reduced to judgment. The lawsuits arise from three loans issued in the late 1990’s. The lender was Town Bank, a Washington State Bank which is no longer in existence, having been acquired by Banner Bank in the early 2000’s. The borrowers on the three separate loans were H&H Holdings, Metrophone Telecom, and Amir Heshmatpour. In the early 2000’s, the three loans were consolidated into one loan, shortly before Banner Bank acquired Town Bank. Once this acquisition occurred, the relationship between the borrowers and the successor lender soured, and a default was ultimately declared on the loans. Judgments were entered in the Superior Court for the State of Washington in 2003 and in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Mr. Heshmatpour contends that negotiated agreements were reached for payment of the outstanding loan balance, resulting in an agreement to pay approximately $11,000,000. Mr. Heshmatpour further contends that the agreements were satisfied, but that Banner Bank failed to properly account for the payments received. Since the early 2000’s, Banner Bank has retained judgment creditor status against Mr. Heshmatpour and his wife, and has added interest to the Superior Court judgment in the amount of approximately 12% per year and to the District Court action in the amount of approximately 6.875% per year. However, for almost the entire decade, no further collection actions were taken and Mr. Heshmatpour believed the matter was resolved. The two judgments have recently been domesticated in the United States District Court for the Central District of California and the California Superior Court. Banner Bank is seeking to enforce the judgments, and Mr. and Mrs. Heshmatpour, who are unaware of the reasons behind the renewed activity, have retained counsel to defend them in the enforcement proceedings. In the District Court action, the Court on June 24, 2013 issued an Order charging the ownership interest in AFH Advisory of Amir Heshmatpour with payment of the unpaid balance in that case of approximately $711,899 and ordering AFH Advisory to pay any distributions due to Amir Heshmatpour directly to Banner Bank. In the Superior Court action, Amir Heshmatpour filed a motion to vacate and/or reduce sister state judgment in the amount of approximately $22,873,957. No settlement has been reached as of the date of this filing.

Due to Parent

12 Months Ended

Oct. 31, 2015

Note 6 - Related Parties

Litigation with AFH Advisory and Amir F. Heshmatpour

Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc.

AFH Advisory is presently a plaintiff and a counterclaim defendant in a matter that is pending in both Delaware Superior Court (Index No. N12C-09-045-MMJ [CCLD]) and Delaware Chancery Court (Index No. C.A. No. 8005-JJ). AFH Advisory brought the suit against Emmaus Life Sciences, Inc. ("Emmaus") in regards to Emmaus' attempt to cancel AFH Advisory's ownership interest in Emmaus, and its refusal to reimburse AFH Advisory for expenses relating to a reverse merger. Emmaus has brought counterclaims against AFH Advisory for a declaratory judgment canceling AFH Advisory's ownership interest in Emmaus, fraud, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. All parties completed document discovery and filed motions for summary judgment. Emmaus' motion for partial summary judgment was granted by the Court, which held that the Third Letter of Intent ("LOI III") between AFH Advisory and Emmaus was terminated, the public offering contemplated by LOI III was terminated, the advisor shares Emmaus gave to AFH Advisory and its affiliates pursuant to the terms of LOI III had been canceled, and that AFH and its affiliated must return all Emmaus shares in their possession. The partial summary judgment motion brought by individual counterclaim defendant Amir Heshmatpour, and joined in by AFH Advisory, was granted in part by the Court, which held that Emmaus was not entitled to compensatory damages on its fraud and fraud in the inducement claims. Following the Court's decision on these summary judgment motions, AFH Advisory does not have any remaining claims against Emmaus. Emmaus continues to maintain claims against AFH Advisory for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment. AFH Advisory has asserted defenses for these remaining claims, and it is defending this matter. On April 7, 2015, a settlement of all claims was reached between the parties whereby AFH Advisory agreed to transfer publicly traded securities of one of AFH’s portfolio companies to Emmaus with a current trading value of $30,000.

Emerald Dairy, Inc.

AFH Advisory and other entities brought a lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County against Emerald Dairy, Inc. (“Emerald”) and its Chairman, Mr. Shan, asserting that they were entitled to a large number of shares of Emerald, both from Emerald and from shares individually owned, and pledged, by Chairman Shan. Emerald and Chairman Shang defaulted. On March 27, 2015, a default judgment was issued by the Superior Court of California in favor of AFH Advisory in the amount of $1,132,181 which includes damages of $897,121, prejudgment interest of $224,260, and attorney fees of $10,800.

Banner Bank Judgment

Mr. Amir Heshmatpour is a defendant in two lawsuits related to Banner Bank which have been reduced to judgment.

The lawsuits arise from three loans issued in the late 1990’s. The lender was Town Bank, a Washington State Bank which is no longer in existence, having been acquired by Banner Bank in the early 2000’s. The borrowers on the three separate loans were H&H Holdings, Metrophone Telecom, and Amir Heshmatpour. In the early 2000’s, the three loans were consolidated into one loan, shortly before Banner Bank acquired Town Bank. Once this acquisition occurred, the relationship between the borrowers and the successor lender soured, and a default was ultimately declared on the loans. Judgments were entered in the Superior Court for the State of Washington in 2003 and in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Mr. Heshmatpour contends that negotiated agreements were reached for payment of the outstanding loan balance, resulting in an agreement to pay approximately $11,000,000. Mr. Heshmatpour further contends that the agreements were satisfied, but that Banner Bank failed to properly account for the payments received. Since the early 2000’s, Banner Bank has retained judgment creditor status against Mr. Heshmatpour and his wife, and has added interest to the Superior Court judgment in the amount of approximately 12% per year and to the District Court action in the amount of approximately 6.875% per year. However, for almost the entire decade, no further collection actions were taken and Mr. Heshmatpour believed the matter was resolved.

The two judgments have recently been domesticated in the United States District Court for the Central District of California and the California Superior Court. Banner Bank is seeking to enforce the judgments, and Mr. and Mrs. Heshmatpour, who are unaware of the reasons behind the renewed activity, have retained counsel to defend them in the enforcement proceedings.

In the District Court action, the Court on June 24, 2013 issued an Order charging the ownership interest in AFH Advisory of Amir Heshmatpour with payment of the unpaid balance in that case of approximately $711,899 and ordering AFH Advisory to pay any distributions due to Amir Heshmatpour directly to Banner Bank. In the Superior Court action, Amir Heshmatpour filed a motion to vacate and/or reduce sister state judgment in the amount of approximately $22,873,957. No settlement has been reached as of the date of this filing.