Legal Memorandum: Admissibility of Price Differentials as Evidence

Issue: In Texas, may a trial court permit testimony regarding price differentials to prove damages?

In TA s "Tempo Tamers, Inc. v. Crow-Houston Four, Ltd., 715 S" c 1 l "Tempo Tamers, Inc. v. Crow-Houston Four, Ltd., 715 S.W.2d 658(Tex. App.—Dallas 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.)"Tempo Tamers, Inc. v. Crow-Houston Four, Ltd., 715 S.W.2d 658, 662 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1986, writ ref’d n.r.e.), the appellate court ruled that the trial court erroneously allowed introduction of invoices, which constituted impermissible hearsay.  The court specifically reasoned that the invoices were inadmissible because they were not supported by evidence that the party offering the invoices paid the amount stated thereon.  TA s "Tempo Tamers, Inc. v. Crow-Houston Four, Ltd., 715 S" c 1Id. at 662.  There was error admitting the invoices to show the costs of repair without testimony that such amounts were actually paid.  Id.

“The trial court is the gatekeeper of expert evidence, and appellate courts cannot usurp that function.”  TA s "Reliance Ins. Co. v. Denton Cent. Appraisal Dist., 9" c 1 l "Reliance Ins. Co. v. Denton Cent. Appraisal Dist., 999 S.W.2d 626 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1999, no writ)"Reliance Ins. Co. v. Denton Cent. Appraisal Dist., 999 S.W.2d 626, 630 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1999, no writ).  Like admission of evidence generally, the qualification of an expert witness is within the trial court’s discretion.  TA s "Lincoln Property Co. v. DeShazo, 4 S.W.3d 55, 60 (Te" c 0Lincoln Property Co., 4 S.W.3d at 58.  The appellate court reviews such […]