Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Chicago, Dec. 11, 1902. To the Editor: —Referring to the notice inThe Journal, December 6, concerning suit brought against me for damages, allow me to state the facts: During an operation by Dr. Lemke in the year 1898 his patient had a cerebral embolism, followed by a partial hemiplegia. Shortly after that a lawsuit was commenced against Dr. Lemke, and I was included in the suit, on account of the supposed financial relations between Dr. Lemke and myself. I was not present at the time Dr. Lemke operated, and had nothing to do with the case. The case was tried two weeks ago, and when the plaintiff had completed his evidence, and without the presentation of witnesses and without a defense on the part of Dr. Lemke or myself, the judge instructed the jury to return a verdict in favor of the defendants, thus exonerating Dr. Lemke from any
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 2 | |
| downloads | 4 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts