James Q. Holder v. Westgate Resorts Ltd., 356 S.W.3d 373

Holder sustained multiple injuries after a fall on Westgate’s staircase in Gatlinburg; plaintiffs sued for premises liability alleging unsafe configuration and Westgate’s knowledge of the condition.
During trial, the court excluded part of Westgate’s expert Horner’s testimony about a telephone call with International Code Council officials as hearsay.
The jury found Westgate 90% at fault and Holder 10% at fault; damages were $220,000, reduced by Holder’s comparative fault to $198,000.
Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred in excluding Horner’s ICC-based testimony and that error was harmless; it affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
Tennessee Supreme Court held the Court of Appeals misapplied Rule 703 (amended after trial); the trial court’s exclusion of the ICC-related testimony was proper; the Court vacated the Court of Appeals and affirmed the trial court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ICC conversation was hearsay and improperly admitted.	Holder argues Horner’s ICC call is admissible as part of his basis.	Westgate contends the ICC testimony is a proper basis for expert opinion.	Horner ICC testimony was hearsay and properly excluded.
Whether the amended Rule 703 should have governed at trial.	Holder contends Rule 703 as amended should apply.	Westgate contends the trial should follow the pre-amendment rule.	Apply the Rule 703 version in effect at the time of trial; amended rule not applicable.
Whether any admissible foundation could support Horner’s reliance on ICC testimony.	Holder relies on the general basis for expert opinions.	Westgate relies on ICC sources to support Horner’s interpretation.	ICC-based foundation testimony not admissible to substitute for non-testifying experts; limited admission not permitted.

Brown v. Crown Equip. Corp., 181 S.W.3d 268 (Tenn. 2005) (abuse-of-discretion standard for admissibility of expert testimony)
State v. Lewis, 235 S.W.3d 136 (Tenn. 2007) (admissibility of expert testimony based on hearsay not excluded when trustworthy)
State v. Jordan, 325 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2010) (need for limiting instruction when hearsay is used to support opinion)
Arias v. Duro Standard Prods. Co., 303 S.W.3d 256 (Tenn. 2010) (hearsay exceptions and admissibility considerations)
McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992) (modified comparative fault framework)
Tuggle v. Allright Parking Sys, Inc., 922 S.W.2d 105 (Tenn. 1996) (derivative loss of consortium considerations for comparative fault)