U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1991

Venteicher v. U.S. Government

Venteicher v. U.S. Government
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 3, 1991
937 F.2d 604; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 20342; 1991 WL 117988 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Venteicher v. U.S. Government

Opinion

937 F.2d 604
Unpublished Disposition

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Roger G. VENTEICHER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
and
Desi Jo Venteicher, Rebecca Lee Venteicher, Robin Emily
Venteicher, Roger John Venteicher, Jr., Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, United States Army, Lieutenant
Jerry Ervin, Colonel William A. Vanzylveld, Major Edward K.
Jeffer, Psychiatrist, 1st Lieutenant Richard T. Edwards, 1st
Lieutenant Danny R. Denter, Captain Beatrice Archer, 1st
Lieutenant Thomas B. Williams, Lt. Colonel Dennis W. Healy,
Major Robert R. Beauchamp, 1st Sergeant Herbert V. Akers,
Captain Ginger L. Simonton, Captain John J. Carroll, III,
Major General Samuel N. Wakevield, John Doe, Jane Doe,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 91-6283.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 17, 1991.
Decided July 3, 1991.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-89-765-N)

Roger G. Venteicher, appellant pro se.

Susan Lynn Watt, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Va., for appellee.

E.D.Va.

AFFIRMED.

Before SPROUSE and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

1

Roger G. Venteicher appeals from the district court's order dismissing his Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), action. Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Venteicher v. United States, CA-89-765-N (E.D.Va. Dec. 13, 1990). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

2

AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.