Columbia Standard

In the midst of South Carolina’s growing asbestos docket, a trial between Anglo American and its De Beers diamond unit concerning allegations that they hid assets from U.S.-based plaintiffs will be delayed until February, as the presiding judge, known for her plaintiff-friendly rulings and courtroom demeanor hostile to defendants, seeks “a reasonable way" to move the trial forward.

“I want to find a reasonable way to move this trial forward at this point,” said Judge Jean H. Toal at the start of a hearing in Columbia, S.C, last week.

Judge Toal has rejected all arguments that she lacks jurisdiction over the foreign companies, which are based in the U.K. and never sold asbestos in South Carolina, in addition to turning away defense lawyers’ objections that they needed much more information from the other side, including expert witness reports, before they would be prepared for trial.

However, Toal did order the trial, first slated for Dec. 9, postponed until early February—after it was learned G. Murrell Smith, the South Carolina Speaker of the House who works on the plaintiffs’ side, may be in legislative session at that time.

Last year, Toal appointed local personal injury attorney Peter Protopapas over Cape Plc, a former South African asbestos mining company whose corporate successor is now owned by French-Syrian billionaire Mohed Altrad.

Toal bestowed upon Protopapas the power to demand documents and sue third parties for money to pay asbestos claims, leading Protopapas to make just such a demand of Cape’s corporate parents and Anglo American.

Meanwhile, Anglo American is seeking information from Protopapas about the foundation for his claims that it participated in an asset-hiding scheme with Cape, an entity it never owned or controlled.

Scott Balber of Herbert Smith Freehills, counsel for Anglo American, said discovery to this point has only revealed publicly available materials, none of which support the allegation there was an agreement between the companies to share liability for asbestos exposure claims.

At one point during the hearing, Balber said if the only supporting information was from Google searches “or an article in Sports Illustrated,” that would be fine, only the defendants need to know that.

Anglo American says they have spent millions of dollars to produce 70,000 pages of documents and review corporate records dating back to 1950, to see if anything could show they are responsible for Cape’s asbestos liabilities.

Anglo American also seeks details of Protopapas’ communications with lawyers for plaintiffs named Tibbs who are suing Cape. While defense lawyers say that underlying case has been settled, Protopapas denied that was the case.

Protopapas’ counsel, John T. Lay, who during the hearing compared deaths and illnesses from asbestos to the Holocaust, suggested the sought-after communications may be shielded by attorney-client privilege.

Balber maintains that since Lay and counsel for the Tibbs are adversaries, no privilege would exist between those parties.

But Toal wasn’t convinced, and delayed a decision on that issue until being briefed further, maintaining there could be “some real danger points” with allowing Anglo American to see the emails.

Pointing to plaintiff-friendly rulings, defense lawyers have tried without success to see Toal recused from her role as presiding judge over South Carolina’s asbestos litigation.

During the hearing earlier this week, Toal, now in her 80s, explained that she had worked as a defense attorney and that her own family’s sand mine had faced claims in court connected to silicosis, a lung disease caused by inhalation of crystalline silicon dioxide.

But Toal added that proper product identification showed that sand from her family’s mine wasn’t present at the site where workers became ill.

“That was as it should be. That’s how the law works,” Toal said. “And that’s how the law’s gonna work in this case.”

Toal mentioned what she referred to as “pejorative” descriptions of Speaker Smith’s involvement in the case and how the December trial date had first been set so as not to conflict with the state legislative calendar.

“Mr. Smith has appeared when he’s required to,” Toal said.

The judge added she did the same during her 15-year tenure in the South Carolina legislature, as counsel for Protopapas worked to confirm Rep. Smith’s schedule in 2025 with him during the hearing.

Defense lawyers have tried on multiple occasions to remove cases to federal court and appeal Toal’s rulings, but have not been successful. Specifically, Toal labeled an attempt by Cape to block Protopapas by suing him in U.K. court, as “particularly problematic.”

Though Cape’s lawyers were silent throughout the hearing, Toal warned them not to interfere with the revised trial schedule.

The warning is well-founded, due to Toal’s history of harsh sanctions against defendants who challenge her or appeal her rulings, calling them “frivolous” and “a waste of time.”

Toal is now considering a $2.2 million legal bill submitted by law firm Morgan Lewis for work it did on a successful sanctions order against Cape’s French owner, Altrad Group.

“I will file my scheduling order and pray the biggest prayer I have we don’t have any other people involved in this matter who try to appeal my order. If they try to do anything along those lines, as they have once already, that will be a real problem,” Toal said.