Legal Proceedings	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2015
Disclosure Text Block Supplement [Abstract]
Legal Matters and Contingencies [Text Block]	Note 22 — Legal Proceedings. Shareholder and Derivative Litigation. On March 4, 2015, a purported class action complaint was filed entitled Yeung v. Akorn, Inc., at el., in the federal district court of Northern District of Illinois, No. 15-cv-1944. The complaint alleged that the Company and three of its officers violated the federal securities laws in connection with matters related to its accounting and financial reporting in the wake of its acquisitions of Hi-Tech Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. and VersaPharm, Inc. A second, related case entitled Sarzynski v. Akorn, Inc., et al., No. 15- cv-3921, was filed on May 4, 2015, makes similar allegations and seeks unspecified damages. On August 24, 2015, the two cases were consolidated and a lead plaintiff appointed in In re Akorn, Inc. Securities Litigation. No motions or answer have been filed in the case. Two shareholder derivative lawsuits also have been filed alleging breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the Company’s accounting for its acquisition and pending restatement of its financials. The cases are Safriet v. Rai, et al., No. 15-cv-7275 filed August 19, 2015, and Glaubach v. Rai, et al., No. 15- 11129 filed December 10, 2015, and seek unspecified monetary damages, restitution from the individual defendants and specified changes to the Company’s corporate governance and internal procedures. Both cases were filed in the Northern District of Illinois and have been stayed pending anticipated rulings on any motions to dismiss the defendants may file in In re Akorn, Inc. Securities Litigation. On March 8, 2016, an additional case was filed, Kogut v. Akorn, Inc., et al., in Louisiana state court in the Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 646474. The Kogut action seeks an order requiring the Company to make its pending SEC filings, issue audited financial statements, and hold its annual shareholder meeting. Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Akorn Inc., Sean Brynjelsen, and Michael Stehn, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 12-cv-07692-LLS. Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Fera”) filed this action on September 12, 2012. The defendants in the case are the Company and two of its employees, Sean Brynjelsen and Michael Stehn. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company breached certain terms of a contract manufacturing supply agreement by, among other things, failing to manufacture Fera’s products, raising the manufacturing cost, and impermissibly terminating the contract. In addition, Fera alleges that the Company misappropriated Fera’s trade secrets in order to manufacture Erythromycin and Bacitracin for its own benefit. The counts in the amended complaint are for (1) breach of contract, (2) misappropriation of trade secrets, (3) fraudulent inducement, and (4) declaratory and injunctive relief. Fera seeks $135 million in compensatory damages, an additional, unspecified amount in punitive damages, and injunctive relief restraining the Company from selling the products at issue in the case. The Company filed a counterclaim against Fera and certain affiliates, as well as Perrigo Company of Tennessee and Perrigo Company plc, asserting violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and tortious interference with business relations. The case is still in the discovery phase, and no trial date has been scheduled. State of Louisiana v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., et al., The Louisiana Attorney General filed suit, Number 624,522, Nineteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, including Hi-Tech Pharmacal and other defendants, in Louisiana state court. Louisiana’s complaint alleges that the defendants violated Louisiana state laws in connection with Medicaid reimbursement for certain vitamins, dietary supplements, and DESI products that were allegedly ineligible for reimbursement. The defendants filed exceptions of no cause of action and no right of action in response to Louisiana’s amended complaint. In a judgment entered on October 2, 2015, the trial court sustained the defendants’ exception of no right of action, which dismissed all of Louisiana’s claims. Louisiana sought appellate review of the court’s decision by filing an application for supervisory writs, as well as an appeal pending in the First Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana. In addition to the foregoing matters, Akorn has received shareholder demands for legal action to be taken against certain of the Company’s directors and officers based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and other misconduct in connection with the Company’s restatement of financial results and other matters. Akorn’s Board of Directors formed a special committee to conduct an inquiry into the demand allegations and to provide its conclusions and recommendations to the Board. Former Hi-Tech director and employee Reuben Seltzer delivered to the Company a demand letter in August 2014 alleging that the Company breached his employment agreement and improperly terminated Mr. Seltzer’s employment. Mr. Seltzer further alleges that he is entitled to compensation in the approximate amount of $5.2 million. The Company disputes these claims and intends to vigorously defend these allegations. Other Matters The Chicago Regional Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is conducting an investigation regarding the previously disclosed restatement, internal controls and other related matters. Additionally, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO) has requested information regarding these matters. Akorn has been furnishing requested information and is fully cooperating with the SEC and USAO. The legal matters discussed above could result in losses, including damages, fines and civil penalties, and criminal charges, which could be substantial. We record accruals for these contingencies to the extent that we conclude that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable. As of the date of this filing, although the Company has determined that liabilities associated with these legal matters is reasonably possible, they cannot be reasonably estimated. Given the nature of the litigation and investigations discussed above and the complexities involved, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a possible loss for such matters until the Company knows, among other factors, (i) what claims, if any, will survive dispositive motion practice, (ii) the extent of the claims, including the size of any potential class, particularly when damages are not specified or are indeterminate, (iii) how the discovery process will affect the litigation, (iv) the settlement posture of the other parties to the litigation and (v) any other factors that may have a material effect on the litigation or investigation. However, we could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise our expectations regarding the outcome of certain matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and/or our cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid.

Note 22 — Legal Proceedings.

Shareholder and Derivative Litigation. On March 4, 2015, a purported class action complaint was filed entitled Yeung v. Akorn, Inc., at el., in the federal district court of Northern District of Illinois, No. 15-cv-1944. The complaint alleged that the Company and three of its officers violated the federal securities laws in connection with matters related to its accounting and financial reporting in the wake of its acquisitions of Hi-Tech Pharmaceutical Co., Inc. and VersaPharm, Inc. A second, related case entitled Sarzynski v. Akorn, Inc., et al., No. 15- cv-3921, was filed on May 4, 2015, makes similar allegations and seeks unspecified damages. On August 24, 2015, the two cases were consolidated and a lead plaintiff appointed in In re Akorn, Inc. Securities Litigation. No motions or answer have been filed in the case.

Two shareholder derivative lawsuits also have been filed alleging breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the Company’s accounting for its acquisition and pending restatement of its financials. The cases are Safriet v. Rai, et al., No. 15-cv-7275 filed August 19, 2015, and Glaubach v. Rai, et al., No. 15- 11129 filed December 10, 2015, and seek unspecified monetary damages, restitution from the individual defendants and specified changes to the Company’s corporate governance and internal procedures. Both cases were filed in the Northern District of Illinois and have been stayed pending anticipated rulings on any motions to dismiss the defendants may file in In re Akorn, Inc. Securities Litigation.

On March 8, 2016, an additional case was filed, Kogut v. Akorn, Inc., et al., in Louisiana state court in the Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 646474. The Kogut action seeks an order requiring the Company to make its pending SEC filings, issue audited financial statements, and hold its annual shareholder meeting.

Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Akorn Inc., Sean Brynjelsen, and Michael Stehn, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 12-cv-07692-LLS. Fera Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Fera”) filed this action on September 12, 2012. The defendants in the case are the Company and two of its employees, Sean Brynjelsen and Michael Stehn. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company breached certain terms of a contract manufacturing supply agreement by, among other things, failing to manufacture Fera’s products, raising the manufacturing cost, and impermissibly terminating the contract. In addition, Fera alleges that the Company misappropriated Fera’s trade secrets in order to manufacture Erythromycin and Bacitracin for its own benefit. The counts in the amended complaint are for (1) breach of contract, (2) misappropriation of trade secrets, (3) fraudulent inducement, and (4) declaratory and injunctive relief. Fera seeks $135 million in compensatory damages, an additional, unspecified amount in punitive damages, and injunctive relief restraining the Company from selling the products at issue in the case. The Company filed a counterclaim against Fera and certain affiliates, as well as Perrigo Company of Tennessee and Perrigo Company plc, asserting violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and tortious interference with business relations. The case is still in the discovery phase, and no trial date has been scheduled.

State of Louisiana v. Abbott Laboratories, Inc., et al., The Louisiana Attorney General filed suit, Number 624,522, Nineteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, including Hi-Tech Pharmacal and other defendants, in Louisiana state court. Louisiana’s complaint alleges that the defendants violated Louisiana state laws in connection with Medicaid reimbursement for certain vitamins, dietary supplements, and DESI products that were allegedly ineligible for reimbursement. The defendants filed exceptions of no cause of action and no right of action in response to Louisiana’s amended complaint. In a judgment entered on October 2, 2015, the trial court sustained the defendants’ exception of no right of action, which dismissed all of Louisiana’s claims. Louisiana sought appellate review of the court’s decision by filing an application for supervisory writs, as well as an appeal pending in the First Circuit Court of Appeal in Louisiana.

In addition to the foregoing matters, Akorn has received shareholder demands for legal action to be taken against certain of the Company’s directors and officers based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and other misconduct in connection with the Company’s restatement of financial results and other matters. Akorn’s Board of Directors formed a special committee to conduct an inquiry into the demand allegations and to provide its conclusions and recommendations to the Board.

Former Hi-Tech director and employee Reuben Seltzer delivered to the Company a demand letter in August 2014 alleging that the Company breached his employment agreement and improperly terminated Mr. Seltzer’s employment. Mr. Seltzer further alleges that he is entitled to compensation in the approximate amount of $5.2 million. The Company disputes these claims and intends to vigorously defend these allegations.

Other Matters

The Chicago Regional Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is conducting an investigation regarding the previously disclosed restatement, internal controls and other related matters. Additionally, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO) has requested information regarding these matters. Akorn has been furnishing requested information and is fully cooperating with the SEC and USAO.

The legal matters discussed above could result in losses, including damages, fines and civil penalties, and criminal charges, which could be substantial. We record accruals for these contingencies to the extent that we conclude that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable. As of the date of this filing, although the Company has determined that liabilities associated with these legal matters is reasonably possible, they cannot be reasonably estimated. Given the nature of the litigation and investigations discussed above and the complexities involved, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a possible loss for such matters until the Company knows, among other factors, (i) what claims, if any, will survive dispositive motion practice, (ii) the extent of the claims, including the size of any potential class, particularly when damages are not specified or are indeterminate, (iii) how the discovery process will affect the litigation, (iv) the settlement posture of the other parties to the litigation and (v) any other factors that may have a material effect on the litigation or investigation. However, we could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise our expectations regarding the outcome of certain matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and/or our cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid.