Analyze the case using "IRAC" - "Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion" and answer the question posed at the end of the case prompt (250-300 words or less).

1. Does Debtor's jewerly qualify as necessary and proper wearing apparel, and should it thus be exempt property from the bankruptcy estate?

Second, briefly (150 words or less) describe your opinion on the following regarding this case: Do you believe the outcome is "fair"?

28.1 Bankruptcy Estate Dr. Morris Lebo- vitz and Kerrye Hill Lebovitz, husband and wife, were residents of the state of Tennessee. Dr. Lebo- vitz filed for bankruptcy protection as a result of illness. Mrs. Lebovitz (Debtor) filed for bankruptcy because she had co-signed on a large loan with Dr. Lebovitz. The Debtor is the owner of the following pieces of jewelry: a Tiffany 5-carat diamond engagement ring (purchase price $40,000 to $50,000), a pair of diamond stud ear- rings of approximately 1 carat each, a diamond drop necklace of approximately 1 carat, and a Cartier watch. All of these items were gifts from Dr. Lebovitz. Tennessee opted out of the federal bankruptcy exemption provisions and adopted its own bankruptcy exemption provisions. Tennessee does not provide for an exemption for jewelry. The state does provide for an exemption for "necessary and proper wearing apparel." Debtor claimed that her jewelry was necessary and proper wearing apparel and was therefore exempt prop- erty from the bankruptcy estate. The bankruptcy trustee filed an objection to the claim of exemption, arguing that the Debtor's jewelry does not qualify for an exemp- tion and should be part of the bankruptcy estate. Does Debtor's jewelry qualify as necessary and proper wearing apparel, and should it thus be exempt property from the bankruptcy estate? In re Lebovitz, 344 B.R. 556, 2006 Bankr. Lexis 1044 (United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee, 2006)