The hearsay exception for prior testimony applies only if testimony was in fact previously given.

Battle v. Memorial Hospital at Gulfport, 228 F.3d 544, 552 (5th Cir. 2000) (holding, in plaintiffs' medical malpractice action against defendant physicians and hospital, that Lakeman's deposition was erroneously excluded and should....If the declarant is unavailable, Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1) or a comparable State rule creates a hearsay exception for testimony given as a witness at another hearing of the same or a different proceeding, or in a deposition taken in compliance with law in the course of the same or another proceeding, if the party against whom the testimony is now offered, or, in a civil action or proceeding, a predecessor in interest, had an opportunity and similar motive to develop the testimony by direct, cross, or redirect examination.

Cf. United States v. Gwathney, 465 F.3d 1133, 1140-1142 (10th Cir. 2006) (holding that the trial court erroneously admitted Western Union's response to the DEA's subpoena as a business record exception because the proper foundation....There is a hearsay exception for a memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, institution, association, profession, occupation, or calling if it was the regular practice of that business, institution, association, profession, occupation, or calling to make the memorandum, report, record or data compilation, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness.

Fed. R. Evid. 807.Statements that fall within an exception to the hearsay rule are admissible to prove the truth of the matter asserted by the declarant (the maker of the statement).