Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Feb. 01, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	16. Commitments and Contingencies Chromatex Environmental Claim A lawsuit was filed against us and other defendants (Chromatex, Inc., Rossville Industries, Inc., Rossville Companies, Inc. and Rossville Investments, Inc.) on February 5, 2008 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs are Alan Shulman, Stanley Siegel, Ruth Cherenson as Personal Representative of Estate of Alan Cherenson, and Adrienne Rolla and M.F. Rolla as Executors of the Estate of Joseph Byrnes. The plaintiffs were partners in a general partnership that formerly owned a manufacturing plant in West Hazleton, Pennsylvania (the “Site”). Approximately two years after this general partnership sold the Site to defendants Chromatex, Inc. and Rossville Industries, Inc., we leased and operated the Site as part of our Rossville/Chromatex division. The lawsuit involved court judgments that were entered against the plaintiffs and against defendant Chromatex, Inc. requiring them to pay costs incurred by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) responding to environmental contamination at the Site, in amounts approximating $14 million, plus unspecified future environmental costs. Neither USEPA nor any other governmental authority asserted any claim against us on account of these matters. The plaintiffs sought contribution from us and other defendants and declaring that the company and the other defendants were responsible for environmental response costs under environmental laws and certain agreements. The plaintiffs also asserted that we tortiously interfered with contracts between them and other defendants in the case and diverted assets to prevent the plaintiffs from being paid monies owed to them. We defended ourselves vigorously with regards to the matters described in this litigation. In the first quarter of fiscal 2014, the parties to this lawsuit reached a settlement of all matters, which required us to contribute cash to a global settlement fund. Consequently, we recorded a charge of $206,000 to other expense in the fiscal 2014 Consolidated Statement of Net Income. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014, we paid the $206,000 settlement amount. Subsequently, the settlement was reviewed by the government and during the first quarter of fiscal 2015 the court approved the final agreement by the parties involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on June 5, 2014. Other Litigation The company is involved in legal proceedings and claims which have arisen in the ordinary course of business. Management has determined that it is not reasonably possible that these actions, when ultimately concluded and settled, will have a material adverse effect upon the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the company. Lease We lease a plant facility associated with our mattress fabrics segment from a partnership owned by certain shareholders and officers of the company and their immediate families. At April 27, 2014, this lease was on a month to month basis payable at an amount of $12,704 per month. Effective October 1, 2014, we entered into new lease agreement with the partnership noted above. The new lease agreement requires monthly payments of $13,000 for a three year term commencing on October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2017. This lease contains two successive options to renew the lease with each renewal period being three years. The first and second renewal terms would require monthly payments of $13,100 and $13,200, respectively. Purchase Commitments At February 1, 2015, January 26, 2014, and April 27, 2014, we had open purchase commitments to acquire equipment for our mattress fabrics segment totaling $3.8 million, $3.8 million, and $3.4 million, respectively.

16. Commitments and Contingencies

Chromatex Environmental Claim

A lawsuit was filed against us and other defendants (Chromatex, Inc., Rossville Industries, Inc., Rossville Companies, Inc. and Rossville Investments, Inc.) on February 5, 2008 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs are Alan Shulman, Stanley Siegel, Ruth Cherenson as Personal Representative of Estate of Alan Cherenson, and Adrienne Rolla and M.F. Rolla as Executors of the Estate of Joseph Byrnes. The plaintiffs were partners in a general partnership that formerly owned a manufacturing plant in West Hazleton, Pennsylvania (the “Site”). Approximately two years after this general partnership sold the Site to defendants Chromatex, Inc. and Rossville Industries, Inc., we leased and operated the Site as part of our Rossville/Chromatex division. The lawsuit involved court judgments that were entered against the plaintiffs and against defendant Chromatex, Inc. requiring them to pay costs incurred by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) responding to environmental contamination at the Site, in amounts approximating $14 million, plus unspecified future environmental costs. Neither USEPA nor any other governmental authority asserted any claim against us on account of these matters. The plaintiffs sought contribution from us and other defendants and declaring that the company and the other defendants were responsible for environmental response costs under environmental laws and certain agreements. The plaintiffs also asserted that we tortiously interfered with contracts between them and other defendants in the case and diverted assets to prevent the plaintiffs from being paid monies owed to them. We defended ourselves vigorously with regards to the matters described in this litigation.

In the first quarter of fiscal 2014, the parties to this lawsuit reached a settlement of all matters, which required us to contribute cash to a global settlement fund. Consequently, we recorded a charge of $206,000 to other expense in the fiscal 2014 Consolidated Statement of Net Income. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014, we paid the $206,000 settlement amount. Subsequently, the settlement was reviewed by the government and during the first quarter of fiscal 2015 the court approved the final agreement by the parties involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on June 5, 2014.

Other Litigation

The company is involved in legal proceedings and claims which have arisen in the ordinary course of business. Management has determined that it is not reasonably possible that these actions, when ultimately concluded and settled, will have a material adverse effect upon the financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the company.

Lease

We lease a plant facility associated with our mattress fabrics segment from a partnership owned by certain shareholders and officers of the company and their immediate families. At April 27, 2014, this lease was on a month to month basis payable at an amount of $12,704 per month.

Effective October 1, 2014, we entered into new lease agreement with the partnership noted above. The new lease agreement requires monthly payments of $13,000 for a three year term commencing on October 1, 2014 through September 30, 2017. This lease contains two successive options to renew the lease with each renewal period being three years. The first and second renewal terms would require monthly payments of $13,100 and $13,200, respectively.

Purchase Commitments

At February 1, 2015, January 26, 2014, and April 27, 2014, we had open purchase commitments to acquire equipment for our mattress fabrics segment totaling $3.8 million, $3.8 million, and $3.4 million, respectively.