"Where records relied upon and referred to in an affidavit are neither attached to the affidavit nor included in the record and clearly identified in the affidavit, the affidavit is insufficient." Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank , 260 Ga. 755, 756 (2), 400 S.E.2d 8 (1991) (citation and punctuation omitted). "Since the records were not attached to the [expert's] affidavit or otherwise identified by their location in the evidence admitted of record, the references to these records cannot be used to contest the summary judgment motion."

”); Ware v. Multibank 2009–1 RES–ADC Venture, LLC, 327 Ga.App. 245, 248–49(2), 758 S.E.2d 145 (2014) (holding that affiant sufficiently authenticated records under Georgia's new Evidence Code when she, after setting out her role and personal access to and knowledge of the records created and maintained by the appellee in the ordinary course of business and the appellee's acquisition of the documents through a transfer, referenced and authenticated the various documents attached to her affidavit as exhibits).See Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756–57, 400 S.E.2d 8 (1991) (reversing award of damages in grant of summary judgment when the affidavit “recited that it was based in part on bank records, and it [was] clear from the context that the portion of the affidavit which set out the amount owed by defendants was based on bank records,” but such records were not attached to the affidavit); Jackson v. Cavalry Portfolio Srvs., LLC, 314 Ga.App. 175, 177, 723 S.E.2d 475 (2012) (reversing grant of summary judgment when affidavit and attached exhibits failed to sufficiently prove the amount allegedly due); cf. League v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., 291 Ga.App. 866, 869(2), 663 S.E.2d 266 (2008) (affirming grant of summary judgment to bank and noting that “[o]nce the party moving for summary judgment has made a prima facie showing that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the nonmovant must then come forward with rebuttal evidence to show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact”). For all of the foregoing reasons, we reverse the trial co