In Bell v. Figueredo, 259 Ga. 321 (381 SE2d 29) (1989) plaintiffs had filed a proper renewal of a medical malpractice action, but neglected to file with their complaint the expert affidavit they had filed in their original action. The defendants moved to dismiss the renewal action for failure to comply with OCGA 9-11-9.1 and the plaintiffs filed a response, to which they attached the expert affidavit filed with their original complaint. The trial court nevertheless granted the motion to dismiss and this Court affirmed, holding that because the plaintiffs had not amended their complaint to add the affidavit, we could not review whether failure to file an expert affidavit constituted an amenable defect. The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed, holding that even though it was filed in response to a motion to dismiss, the expert affidavit effectively amended the complaint to state a claim for malpractice, reasoning: The response to the motion to dismiss was filed at a time during the litigation when the right to amend without leave existed under O.C.G.A. 9-11-15 (a). The plaintiffs simply failed to call that attachment an "amendment." It is well-established that there is no magic in nomenclature, and in classifying pleadings we will construe them to serve the best interests of the pleader, judging the pleading by its function rather than by its name. In the present case the affidavit functioned as an amendment to the complaint even though it was called by another name. We hold that under the circumstances of this case the plaintiffs cured their defective complaint by filing an affidavit in response to the defendants' motion to dismiss and thereby complied with O.C.G.A. 9-11-9.1 Id. at 322-323.