Since its initial appearance on the Judicial Hellholes list in 2020, South Carolina asbestos litigation continues to move up. South Carolina has earned a reputation for bias against corporate defendants, unwarranted sanctions, low evidentiary requirements, liability expanding rulings, unfair trials, severe verdicts, a willingness to overturn or modify jury verdicts to benefit plaintiffs, and frequent appointment of a receiver to maximize recoveries from insurers.
As described in the 2023/2024 Judicial Hellholes report, the2024 asbestos litigation filings are overall 8% higher with 153 more lawsuits filed by August 2024 than in 2023.South Carolina asbestos filings have risen dramatically since 2018, particularly due to the activity of out-of- state plaintiffs’ firms. The number of defendants named in asbestos cases hovered between 50 to 60 per year in 2018 and 2019, then dramatically increased. Beginning in 2020, South Carolina asbestos cases have named more than 105 defendants on average each year. This is much higher than the national average. A total of 70 companies were named in asbestos lawsuits in 2022.
The asbestos docket has expanded by appointing a receiver over various entity defendants. Here, certain South Carolina courts have made a practice of declaring insurers the “alter ego” of defunct entities to subject the companies to lawsuits like other asbestos defendants.
When it comes to trial activity, South Carolina has experienced multiple nuclear verdicts to the tune of $29 million, $32 million, and even $63 million as recently as August 2024. South Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Jean Hoefer Toal presides over the asbestos docket and has been known to increase jury damage awards. On more than one occasion, the court has been asked to recuse the judge, arguing that “factually unsubstantiated and procedurally irregular findings call into question Chief Justice Toal’s impartiality and create an unacceptable risk of actual bias.” However, the South Carolina Court of Appeals has affirmed several of Judge Toal’s expansive rulings, contributing to the state’s reputation as an outlier in its handling of asbestos cases.
The door remains open for more lawsuits in the South Carolina litigation docket. We anticipate seeing more cases, as asbestos litigation filings continue to grow.