of the estate. D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judge, dissenting: As the majority recognizes, the sole issue for consideration in this case is whether the Tax Court erred in holding that the securities law restrictions that attached to shares of stock owned by McClatchy during his lifetime did not affect the federal estate tax liability of McClatehy’s estate. Because I believe that the Tax Court’s decision was correct, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion. The federal estate tax is not assessed against the decedent, but against the decedent’s estate. See 26 U.S.C. § 2001(a) (“A tax is hereby imposed on the transfer of the taxable estate of every decedent who is a citizen or resident of the United States.”); Estate of Curry v. United States, 706 F.2d 1424, 1429 (7th Cir. 1983) ■ (<HOLDING>). In my view, it follows that McClatchy’s stock
recognizing that exempt property ceases to be property of the estate holding that a legal malpractice claim arising from errors by an attorney in rendering estateplanning services is properly brought by the personal representative of the estate when excess estate taxes are paid by the estate in contravention of the decedents intended estate plan holding that if dispute involves funds that are not property of estate it cannot be maintained in the bankruptcy court unless it is related to the bankruptcy proceeding which means it is likely to affect the debtors estate holding that erisa benefits are not property of the estate holding that for estate tax purposes property is to be valued as it exists in the hands of the estate