Argumentative Essay: Mr. Burgess's Cause Of Action

In this matter, there are a series of events upon which Mr. Burgess’s cause of action might be said to accrue. First, Mr. Burgess experiences facts sufficient to sustain the claims alleged in this lawsuit at the precise moment when the defendants act under color of any law to cause the deprivation of any rights secured by the Constitution. 46 U.S.C. § 1983. If we accept Mr. Burgess’s allegations as true—they are not—Mr. Burgess’s cause of action was sustainable at the moment when he could have sustained a cause of action against the Defendants for treating him in a manner not consistent with the rights secured to him by virtue of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—namely, that date Mr. Burgess was convicted. Moreover, there is no legitimate basis upon which to claim that Mr. Burgess was blamelessly ignorant of facts upon which to trigger the discovery rule because his subjective belief that he was innocent gives him

Burgess of the knowledge sufficient to prosecute his claim as of 1995, surely Mr. Burgess surely possessed knowledge sufficient to inquire as to the circumstances of his conviction in October of 1998 when “Charles Dorsey, wrote a letter confessing to the crime” and “repeated that admission several times in letters to Plaintiff’s criminal defense attorney.” (Amended Compl. ¶ 40). And if that is not enough to charge Mr. Burgess of knowledge sufficient to prosecute his cause of action, in 2012, Mr. Burgess came into possession of a letter from Ms. Dyson’s son Mr. Rainey written seventeen (17) years after a crime that occurred when he was six (6) years old articulating (with an elephant-like memory) that he specifically recalls that witnessing the crime, speaking with police, and that Mr. Burgess was not involved in this crime. Either of these two developments must necessarily have been sufficient to place Mr. Burgess on notice to investigate the circumstances of his