facts or data to form opinions or inferences, the facts or data need not be admissible as evidence. Id. Respondent’s appraiser testified that he relied on the deceased appraiser’s report for building size, land layout and the report’s role in a “real life transaction,” as a bank relied on the deceased appraiser’s report to evaluate financing in 1994. Because the deceased appraiser’s report was offered for a purpose consistent with Rule 703(a), we conclude that the tax court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the report into evidence as part of respondent’s appraiser’s report. Even if the county had demonstrated that the tax court abused its discretion in admitting the report, we do not find the evidentiary ruling unfairly prejudiced the county. See Marquette, 589 N.W.2d at 307 (<HOLDING>). The report is mentioned briefly in a footnote
holding to warrant reversal the appellant must show both the error of the ruling and resulting prejudice holding that prosecutorial error does not warrant reversal unless substantial prejudice results holding that even if evidence admitted in error admission must result in material prejudice to warrant reversal holding that even when the trial court commits error in allowing the admission of hearsay statements one must show that such error was prejudicial in order to warrant reversal holding any error in admission of evidence cured when same evidence later admitted without objection