Litigation and Other Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Litigation and Other Contingencies	Apr. 30, 2012
Litigation and Other Contingencies [Abstract]
Litigation and Other Contingencies	4. Litigation and Contingencies Racusin. The Company and Racusin entered into a Settlement Agreement on September 3, 2004 to resolve a claim that Racusin had against the Company in its Chapter 11 bankruptcy case (the "Racusin Claim"). Subsequently, various claims and counter claims have been heard in bankruptcy court and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. On January 14, 2009, Racusin filed a claim against the Company for breach of the Settlement Agreement and motion for summary judgment on that claim to accelerate amounts due along with penalty interest. On August 18, 2009, the Court entered an order granting summary judgment in favor of Racusin, which accelerated amounts due and imposed penalty interest at 12% per annum. The Company moved for rehearing in spring 2010 in which the Court vacated the order on December 23, 2010. On April 20, 2011, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of Racusin's still pending complaint for breach of the Settlement Agreement, further relief related to earlier pleadings, as well as a refund of alleged overpayments the Company made. On October 7, 2011, the Court entered findings and conclusions in favor of the Company on its motion for summary judgment. Specifically, the Court ruled that Racusin's complaint against the Company for breach of the Settlement Agreement was dismissed. The Court also ruled that interest on amounts due Racusin did not accrue during the time when the Company had deposited with 250,000 shares of AWI common stock with the Court pursuant to Court instructions. The Court also ruled that the Company had satisfied its obligations in full to Racusin under the Settlement Agreement and thus did not have to make any further payments to Racusin. The Court also ruled, however, that it would not make a determination on the amount that the Company allegedly overpaid under the Settlement Agreement and thus did not release such alleged overpayment back to the Company without further proceedings to determine what rights, if any, the Company, Racusin and certain other parties in interest had to such funds, as well as allowing for appeals to be taken from the Court's decisions. Also on October 7, 2011, Racusin noticed his intent to appeal the Court's decision granting the Company summary judgment to the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Appeal briefs have been filed under case number BAP. No. NV-11-1549; oral arguments have not been scheduled. If the Company were to prevail through the appellate process in accordance with the Court's findings and conclusions from October 7, 2011, it is estimated that the Company's payments deposited with the Court through October 31, 2011, in connection with these matters, have exceeded the amount due by $239,000, including the $160,000 paid to cover prepaid expenses as of such date. There is no assurance that the appellate court will agree with our position. Internet Sports International, Ltd. On July 17, 2008, Internet Sports International, Ltd. ("ISI") filed a complaint against three of our subsidiaries, AWI Manufacturing, Inc. ("AWIM"), AWI Gaming, Inc. ("AWIG") and Computerized Bookmaking Systems, Inc. ("CBS"), and our General Counsel (collectively, "the Defendants"). On February 3, 2010, the Defendants and ISI engaged in consensual mediation, which resulted in a global settlement. The parties subsequently entered into a Settlement Agreement whereby AWIM agreed to pay to ISI the total sum $170,000 in exchange for a mutual release of all claims. The outstanding balance of the Settlement Agreement as of April 30, 2012 was $40,000. Economic Conditions and Related Risks and Uncertainties. Delaware legalized sports wagering in the form of parlay cards on professional football in 2009. New Jersey also recently passed legislation to permit sports wagering; however, the legislation is not effective and may be subject to legal challenge. Should sports wagering expand into more state jurisdictions, or become permissible to be conducted via the internet, such an expansion could reduce the total number of wagers placed in Nevada while correspondingly increasing the opportunities for both wagering and system sales for our Company outside the State. However, we cannot predict that such an expansion will occur at all or provide any assurance that any expansion would create a positive impact on our financial position. Locally, our business is vulnerable to downturns in national and local economic conditions, including, without limitation, downturns in the economy related to threatened or actual terrorist attacks; pandemic outbreaks or similar widespread health epidemics; natural disasters; tightening of available credit; increasing government regulation, spending and taxes; increasing energy costs; increasing interest rates; declining consumer confidence; and declines in the stock market. The demand for entertainment and leisure activities tends to be highly sensitive to consumers' disposable incomes, and thus a decline in general economic conditions or an increase in transportation or other costs will likely lead to our customers having less discretionary income with which to travel to Nevada and wager. As of April 30, 2012, Nevada still has the highest unemployment rates in the country. Thus, the residual effects of higher transportation costs, foreclosures and continued pressure on housing prices, as well as business failures and stock market volatility will place added strain on consumers' ability to make purchases, repay their loans and thus, leave fewer funds available for travel and leisure activities. We have also experienced a change in gambling patterns of our patrons, including a trend toward more conservative bets, which tend to be less profitable to the Company. In addition, there is intense competition among companies that offer race and sports book wagering services as well as those that supply systems to the gaming industry. Most of our competitors have significantly greater financial, marketing, technical and other resources than we do. In our effort to achieve a cost efficient wagering model and to provide technologically advanced products to the gaming industry, we invested significant resources into research and development in 2011. Several years of increased reinvestment costs, increased competition, and coupled with reduced cash flow from a distressed economy and altered consumer betting patterns have had a significant adverse effect on us; thus, compelling our merger with the Purchaser. On June 7, 2012, the Nevada Gaming Control Board recommended to the Nevada Gaming Commission that the transaction contemplated by the Merger Agreement, and related findings of suitability, be approved. The Nevada Gaming Commission is scheduled to meet on June 21, 2012. Should the Nevada Gaming Commission accept the Nevada Gaming Control Board's recommendation and grant approval of the transaction, then we would expect the closing of the merger to occur on or about June 27, 2012, in accordance with the process set forth in the Merger Agreement. Although we have no reason to indicate otherwise, no assurances can be given that the Nevada Gaming Commission will grant approval on June 21, 2012, or that closing will occur on June 27, 2012 (Note 7). The Company often carries cash and cash equivalents, including statutorily restricted amounts, on deposit with financial institutions substantially in excess of federally-insured limits. The extent of a future loss as a result of uninsured deposits in the event of a future failure of a bank or other financial institution, if any, is not subject to estimation at this time.

AMERICAN WAGERING INC 10-Q