JACK B. WEINSTEIN, Senior District Judge
Plaintiff brings this action on the theory that her father and mother were exposed to asbestos, suffered diseases as a result, and that she is entitled to compensation from the Manville Personal Injury Trust. Her father apparently worked in an industry where exposure of the kind she describes is not unlikely.
People working with asbestos did regularly bring asbestos dust home with them on their clothing, exposing spouses and other family members who then sometimes exhibited systems of asbestos diseases. Thus, plaintiff's claim is credible. Nevertheless her claim must be dismissed because there is no evidence that either of her parents suffered from any disease related to asbestos exposure.
Because plaintiff was pro se, the court requested a leading firm prosecuting asbestos cases to attempt to assist her. By letter dated May 6, 2002 (sealed) the law firm, after an investigation, found no basis for it to proceed with the claim.
The court's own inquiry of plaintiff on the record leads to the conclusion that the claim has no basis in fact.
The case was dismissed earlier because of plaintiff's failure to appear on a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff now moves to set aside the dismissal. That motion is denied and the case is dismissed on the merits.
The clerk shall enter a judgment of dismissal. No costs or disbursements.
At plaintiff's oral request on the record, the clerk shall file a notice of appeal on plaintiff's behalf.
SO ORDERED.