- 4 -
including petitioners’ answers to interrogatories, over
respondent’s objections, but warned petitioners that we would
accord little weight to the documents. To hold otherwise would
prejudice respondent because he did not have the opportunity to
cross-examine petitioners regarding the authenticity of the
documents or the veracity of petitioners’ answers to
interrogatories. We stand by that ruling. The factual
background is therefore based on the stipulation of facts and
exhibits submitted to the Court.
Petitioner Dr. Dennis Lofstrom (Mr. Lofstrom) leads a very
active life. For most of his life, Mr. Lofstrom lived and worked
in Minnesota, where he raised a family of 11 children with his
wife, Dorothy Lofstrom (Dorothy). Mr. Lofstrom later divorced
Dorothy and retired from his full-time medical practice. Mr.
Lofstrom embarked at age 70 in 1995 upon a medical missionary
trip to Antarctica with his second wife, Paula Lofstrom (Paula).
Petitioners embarked upon another medical missionary trip in 2002
to serve at a hospital in Tanzania, Africa, for 5 years.
This case concerns three varieties of deductions that
petitioners claimed in 1997 and 1998. The first relates to
alimony.
Alimony Deduction
Mr. Lofstrom was ordered to pay Dorothy $1,500 per month in
alimony (or support maintenance payments) pursuant to their
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011