Legal Proceedings	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Legal Proceedings	LEGAL PROCEEDINGS The Company is and may become involved in various lawsuits as well as other certain legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. Information regarding certain material proceedings is provided below. UTHE Technology Corporation v. Aetrium Incorporated Since December 1993, an action brought by UTHE Technology Corporation (“UTHE”) against ATRM and its then sales manager for Southeast Asia (“Sales Manager”), asserting federal securities claims, a RICO claim, and certain state law claims, had been stayed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. UTHE’s claims were based on its allegations that four former employees of a Singapore company, which UTHE formerly owned, conspired to and did divert business from the subsidiary, and directed that business to themselves and a secret company they had formed, which forced UTHE to sell its subsidiary shares to the former employee defendants at a distressed price. The complaint alleged that ATRM and the Sales Manager participated in the conspiracy carried out by the former employee defendants. In December 1993, the case was dismissed as to the former employee defendants because of a contract requiring UTHE and them to arbitrate their claims in Singapore. The district court stayed the case against ATRM and the Sales Manager pending the resolution of arbitration in Singapore involving UTHE and three of the former employee defendants, but not involving ATRM or the Sales Manager. ATRM received notice in March 2012 that awards were made in the Singapore arbitration against one or more of the former employee defendants who were parties to the arbitration. In June 2012, UTHE filed a motion to reopen the case against ATRM and the Sales Manager and to lift the stay, which the court granted. On September 13, 2013, the court entered final judgment dismissing all remaining claims UTHE asserted against ATRM in the litigation. On September 23, 2013, UTHE appealed the district court judgment to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit only as to the dismissal of UTHE’s RICO claim. The appeal was argued in a court hearing on November 19, 2015. On December 11, 2015, the court of appeal issued an order reversing the district court’s grant of summary judgment of UTHE’s RICO claim and remanded the case back to the district court for further proceedings. On July 14, 2016, ATRM filed a motion for summary judgment in the district court seeking dismissal of the sole remaining RICO claim. On August 26, 2016, the district court granted ATRM’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case. On September 19, 2016, UTHE filed its appeal to the Ninth Circuit of the district court’s grant of summary judgment and dismissal. The parties completed the appellate briefing on February 13, 2017. Oral arguments were held by the appellate court on February 14, 2018. On July 2, 2018, the Ninth District Court of Appeals rendered its decision affirming the District Court’s opinion and upheld the dismissal of the case against ATRM. UTHE did not appeal that decision to the Supreme Court of the United States by the October 1, 2018 deadline. As such, this Ninth Circuit affirmance of the case dismissal stands, and the lawsuit has been successfully and completely defeated by the Company. KBE Building Corporation v. KBS Builders, Inc., and ATRM Holdings, Inc., et. al. At the time of the KBS acquisition in April 2014, KBS purchased receivables for a construction project known as the Nelton Court Housing Project (“Nelton Court”) in Hartford, CT, and also performed certain “punch-list” and warranty work. Modular units for Nelton Court were supplied by KBS Building Systems, Inc. (“KBS-BSI”) pursuant to a contract with KBE Building Corporation (“KBE”). KBE has asserted claims against KBS-BSI, KBS and ATRM arising out of alleged delays, and for the repair of certain alleged defects in the modular units supplied to the project. KBE’s claim seeks an unspecified amount of damages. The action has been transferred to the complex litigation docket of the Hartford Superior Court. On December 18, 2017, KBS was notified that a global settlement had been reached between all defendants and the plaintiff. Under the settlement, the Company’s insurance carriers have agreed to pay $0.3 million to the plaintiff in full settlement on KBS’s behalf. KBS paid a $10.0 thousand deductible to its insurance carriers for this claim. The Settlement became effective on January 5, 2018. From time to time, in the ordinary course of ATRM’s business, it is party to various other disputes, claims and legal proceedings. In the opinion of management, based on information available at this time, such disputes, claims and proceedings will not have a material effect on ATRM’s consolidated financial statements.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The Company is and may become involved in various lawsuits as well as other certain legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. Information regarding certain material proceedings is provided below.

UTHE Technology Corporation v. Aetrium Incorporated

Since December 1993, an action brought by UTHE Technology Corporation (“UTHE”) against ATRM and its then sales manager for Southeast Asia (“Sales Manager”), asserting federal securities claims, a RICO claim, and certain state law claims, had been stayed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. UTHE’s claims were based on its allegations that four former employees of a Singapore company, which UTHE formerly owned, conspired to and did divert business from the subsidiary, and directed that business to themselves and a secret company they had formed, which forced UTHE to sell its subsidiary shares to the former employee defendants at a distressed price. The complaint alleged that ATRM and the Sales Manager participated in the conspiracy carried out by the former employee defendants. In December 1993, the case was dismissed as to the former employee defendants because of a contract requiring UTHE and them to arbitrate their claims in Singapore. The district court stayed the case against ATRM and the Sales Manager pending the resolution of arbitration in Singapore involving UTHE and three of the former employee defendants, but not involving ATRM or the Sales Manager. ATRM received notice in March 2012 that awards were made in the Singapore arbitration against one or more of the former employee defendants who were parties to the arbitration. In June 2012, UTHE filed a motion to reopen the case against ATRM and the Sales Manager and to lift the stay, which the court granted. On September 13, 2013, the court entered final judgment dismissing all remaining claims UTHE asserted against ATRM in the litigation. On September 23, 2013, UTHE appealed the district court judgment to the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit only as to the dismissal of UTHE’s RICO claim. The appeal was argued in a court hearing on November 19, 2015. On December 11, 2015, the court of appeal issued an order reversing the district court’s grant of summary judgment of UTHE’s RICO claim and remanded the case back to the district court for further proceedings. On July 14, 2016, ATRM filed a motion for summary judgment in the district court seeking dismissal of the sole remaining RICO claim. On August 26, 2016, the district court granted ATRM’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case. On September 19, 2016, UTHE filed its appeal to the Ninth Circuit of the district court’s grant of summary judgment and dismissal. The parties completed the appellate briefing on February 13, 2017. Oral arguments were held by the appellate court on February 14, 2018. On July 2, 2018, the Ninth District Court of Appeals rendered its decision affirming the District Court’s opinion and upheld the dismissal of the case against ATRM. UTHE did not appeal that decision to the Supreme Court of the United States by the October 1, 2018 deadline. As such, this Ninth Circuit affirmance of the case dismissal stands, and the lawsuit has been successfully and completely defeated by the Company.

KBE Building Corporation v. KBS Builders, Inc., and ATRM Holdings, Inc., et. al.

At the time of the KBS acquisition in April 2014, KBS purchased receivables for a construction project known as the Nelton Court Housing Project (“Nelton Court”) in Hartford, CT, and also performed certain “punch-list” and warranty work. Modular units for Nelton Court were supplied by KBS Building Systems, Inc. (“KBS-BSI”) pursuant to a contract with KBE Building Corporation (“KBE”). KBE has asserted claims against KBS-BSI, KBS and ATRM arising out of alleged delays, and for the repair of certain alleged defects in the modular units supplied to the project. KBE’s claim seeks an unspecified amount of damages. The action has been transferred to the complex litigation docket of the Hartford Superior Court. On December 18, 2017, KBS was notified that a global settlement had been reached between all defendants and the plaintiff. Under the settlement, the Company’s insurance carriers have agreed to pay $0.3 million to the plaintiff in full settlement on KBS’s behalf. KBS paid a $10.0 thousand deductible to its insurance carriers for this claim. The Settlement became effective on January 5, 2018.

From time to time, in the ordinary course of ATRM’s business, it is party to various other disputes, claims and legal proceedings. In the opinion of management, based on information available at this time, such disputes, claims and proceedings will not have a material effect on ATRM’s consolidated financial statements.