Contingent Liabilities and Litigation	3 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingent liabilities and litigation	Contingent Liabilities and Litigation Legal Proceedings We become involved from time-to-time in disputes, litigation and regulatory matters incidental to our business, including governmental investigations and enforcement actions, personal injury claims, employment matters, commercial disputes, intellectual property matters, qui tam actions (False Claims Act cases initiated by private parties purporting to act on behalf of the government), government contract compliance matters, disputes regarding environmental clean-up costs, litigation in connection with acquisitions and divestitures, and other matters arising out of the normal conduct of our business. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in such litigation. Occasionally, we may suspect that products we manufacture, market or distribute do not meet product specifications, published standards or regulatory requirements. In such circumstances, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales and action by regulators. We accrue for contingencies related to litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates. We are unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss for matters described below, since damages or fines have not been specified or, in our judgment, are unsupported and the proceedings are in early stages with significant uncertainty as to factual issues. We do not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcomes of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, though the outcomes could be material to our results of operations for a particular period. We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets. We recognize estimated loss contingencies for litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges, net in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. Lakeland, Florida Distribution Center DEA Investigation and Related Matters On February 3, 2012, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (the "DEA") issued an order to show cause and immediate suspension of our Lakeland, Florida distribution center's registration to distribute controlled substances, asserting that we failed to maintain required controls against the diversion of controlled substances. On May 14, 2012, we entered into a settlement agreement with the DEA under which our Lakeland registration will remain suspended until May 15, 2014 and the DEA confirmed that it was planning no further administrative actions at any of our other facilities based on conduct prior to the settlement. The settlement agreement did not foreclose the possibility of the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) seeking civil fines for conduct covered by the settlement agreement. In that regard, we are responding to civil subpoenas from two local offices within the DEA and the DOJ. State of West Virginia vs. Cardinal Health, Inc. On June 26, 2012, the West Virginia Attorney General filed complaints against fourteen pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, in the Circuit Court of Boone County, West Virginia alleging, among other things, that the distributors failed to maintain effective controls to guard against diversion of controlled substances in West Virginia, failed to report suspicious orders of controlled substances in accordance with the West Virginia Uniform Controlled Substances Act, were negligent in distributing controlled substances to pharmacies that serve individuals who abuse controlled substances, were unjustly enriched by such conduct, violated consumer credit and protection laws, created a public nuisance, and violated state antitrust laws in connection with the distribution of controlled substances. In addition to injunctive and other equitable relief, the attorney general is seeking monetary damages and the creation of a court-supervised fund, to be financed by the defendants in these actions, for a medical monitoring program focused on prescription drug abuse. Motions have been filed by all defendants to remove the cases to the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. DOJ Civil Investigative Demand In September 2012, we received a civil investigative demand from the DOJ under the Federal False Claims Act requiring us to produce documents relating to the structure of discounts offered or provided to our customers. We are cooperating with the DOJ in this matter. Antitrust Litigation Proceeds During the three months ended September 30, 2012, we recognized $22 million of income resulting from settlements of class action antitrust claims in which we were class members. This amount is recognized in litigation (recoveries)/charges, net in the condensed consolidated statements of earnings. Income Taxes See Note 6 in this Form 10-Q and Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in the 2012 Form 10-K for discussion of contingencies related to our income taxes.

Contingent Liabilities and Litigation

Legal Proceedings

We become involved from time-to-time in disputes, litigation and regulatory matters incidental to our business, including governmental investigations and enforcement actions, personal injury claims, employment matters, commercial disputes, intellectual property matters, qui tam actions (False Claims Act cases initiated by private parties purporting to act on behalf of the government), government contract compliance matters, disputes regarding environmental clean-up costs, litigation in connection with acquisitions and divestitures, and other matters arising out of the normal conduct of our business. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in such litigation.

Occasionally, we may suspect that products we manufacture, market or distribute do not meet product specifications, published standards or regulatory requirements. In such circumstances, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales and action by regulators.

We accrue for contingencies related to litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates.

We are unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss for matters described below, since damages or fines have not been specified or, in our judgment, are unsupported and the proceedings are in early stages with significant uncertainty as to factual issues. We do not believe, based on currently available information, that the outcomes of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, though the outcomes could be material to our results of operations for a particular period.

We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets.

We recognize estimated loss contingencies for litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges, net in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings.

Lakeland, Florida Distribution Center DEA Investigation and Related Matters

On February 3, 2012, the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (the "DEA") issued an order to show cause and immediate suspension of our Lakeland, Florida distribution center's registration to distribute controlled substances, asserting that we failed to maintain required controls against the diversion of controlled substances. On May 14, 2012, we entered into a settlement agreement with the DEA under which our Lakeland registration will remain suspended until May 15, 2014 and the DEA confirmed that it was planning no further administrative actions at any of our other facilities based on conduct prior to the settlement. The settlement agreement did not foreclose the possibility of the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) seeking civil fines for conduct covered by the settlement agreement. In that regard, we are responding to civil subpoenas from two local offices within the DEA and the DOJ.

State of West Virginia vs. Cardinal Health, Inc.

On June 26, 2012, the West Virginia Attorney General filed complaints against fourteen pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, in the Circuit Court of Boone County, West Virginia alleging, among other things, that the distributors failed to maintain effective controls to guard against diversion of controlled substances in West Virginia, failed to report suspicious orders of controlled substances in accordance with the West Virginia Uniform Controlled Substances Act, were negligent in distributing controlled substances to pharmacies that serve individuals who abuse controlled substances, were unjustly enriched by such conduct, violated consumer credit and protection laws, created a public nuisance, and violated state antitrust laws in connection with the distribution of controlled substances. In addition to injunctive and other equitable relief, the attorney general is seeking monetary damages and the creation of a court-supervised fund, to be financed by the defendants in these actions, for a medical monitoring program focused on prescription drug abuse. Motions have been filed by all defendants to remove the cases to the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

DOJ Civil Investigative Demand

In September 2012, we received a civil investigative demand from the DOJ under the Federal False Claims Act requiring us to produce documents relating to the structure of discounts offered or provided to our customers. We are cooperating with the DOJ in this matter.

Antitrust Litigation Proceeds

During the three months ended September 30, 2012, we recognized $22 million of income resulting from settlements of class action antitrust claims in which we were class members. This amount is recognized in litigation (recoveries)/charges, net in the condensed consolidated statements of earnings.

Income Taxes

See Note 6 in this Form 10-Q and Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements in the 2012 Form 10-K for discussion of contingencies related to our income taxes.