"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."

The affidavit also “recited that it was based in part on bank records, and it is clear from the context that the portion of the affidavit which set out the amount owed by [Costa and Achecar] was based on bank records.” Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755 , 756 (2) (400 SE2d 8 ) (1991) (citation omitted). An affidavit that refers to bank records to establish the amount owed on a debt must attach those records.

”); 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

Although the dissent assumes that Felker obtained the knowledge from bank records, Felker neither identified any records as the source of his knowledge nor attached to his affidavit any records addressing the name change or the merger. See Taquechel v. The Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756(2), 400 S.E.2d 8 (1991) (finding affidavit insufficient where it was based in part on records that were neither attached to affidavit nor included in record and clearly identified by affidavit). Nor does his affidavit establish a basis for the admission of any such unidentified documents as business records.

32 on an account ending with the numbers 2163, while the attached credit card agreement and billing statement are associated with Account 9498. See Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756(2), 400 S.E.2d 8 (1991) (“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.”) (citation omitted). Moreover, the July 2010 billing statement was insufficient to establish the amount of damages, even though it showed a balance of $16,855.32 on Account 9498, because it indicated that only $2,840 was due as a minimum payment.

Defendants also assert that the Court should ignore Brooks's affidavit testimony regarding certain account balances allegedly owed to NMAC by Mr. Doll and several of his companies under promissory notes and related guaranties, as well as amounts due to NMAC for certain contractor expenses. Citing Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756, 400 S.E.2d 8, 9 (1991), Defendants argue that the affidavit is insufficient because NMAC failed to attach "account statements" to the affidavit. Defs.' Resp. to Pl.'s Mot. for Summ. J. 4, ECF No. 58. Even if Taquechel were applicable to this federal evidentiary issue, it does not stand for the proposition that "account statements" must be attached in support of an affidavit regarding outstanding loan balances. It stands for the proposition that an affidavit is insufficient if records relied on and referred to in the affidavit are not attached to the affidavit or included in the record.

See League v. Citibank, 291 Ga.App. 866, 869(2), 663 S.E.2d 266 (2008) (summary judgment for creditor affirmed where creditor produced evidence that the debtor requested and obtained the account, accumulated a balance and did not pay); Davis v. Discover Bank, 277 Ga.App. 864, 627 S.E.2d 819 (2006) (summary judgment for creditor affirmed where creditor produced evidence that a credit card was issued to the debtor along with a document providing that if he used the card he accepted the agreement, statements in the debtor's name that were mailed to the debtor and not returned, and an account statement showing the balance due); Roberson v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 250 Ga.App. 350, 352(2), 553 S.E.2d 162 (2001) (creditor was entitled to summary judgment in action on credit card account where it proved written executed agreement, terms of agreement and balance due). See Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756(2), 400 S.E.2d 8 (1991). 9. Intl. Business Consulting v. First Union Nat. Bank, 192 Ga.App. 742–743, 386 S.E.2d 400 (1989) (citation and punctuation omitted).

See League v. Citibank, 291 Ga. App. 866, 869 (2) ( 663 SE2d 266) (2008) (summary judgment for creditor affirmed where creditor produced evidence that the debtor requested and obtained the account, accumulated a balance and did not pay); Davis v. Discover Bank, 277 Ga. App. 864 ( 627 SE2d 819) (2006) (summary judgment for creditor affirmed where creditor produced evidence that a credit card was issued to the debtor along with a document providing that if he used the card he accepted the agreement, statements in the debtor's name that were mailed to the debtor and not returned, and an account statement showing the balance due); Roberson v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 250 Ga. App. 350, 352 (2) ( 553 SE2d 162) (2001) (creditor was entitled to summary judgment in action on credit card account where it proved written executed agreement, terms of agreement and balance due). See Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756 (2) ( 400 SE2d 8) (1991). FIA's affidavit referred to a credit card agreement, which agreement was attached thereto as Exhibit 1. The agreement, which was dated 2006, provided that its terms applied to the user of the account; the agreement further provided that as a result of a merger, the Bank of America account would be issued and administered by FIA.

" (Citation omitted.) Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756 (2) ( 400 SE2d 8) (1991). However, given that Yahoo attached to its Second Weiss Affidavit its business records showing that the parties entered into the contract at issue on March 19, 2002, the terms and conditions of which included a Los Angeles, California forum selection clause, the trial court properly considered the same to that effect.

Casey v. North Decatur Courtyards c. Assn., 213 Ga. App. 190, 191-192 (2) ( 444 SE2d 361) (1994). When records relied upon and referred to in an affidavit are neither attached to the affidavit nor included in the record, the affidavit is insufficient. Taquechel v. Chattahoochee Bank, 260 Ga. 755, 756 (2) ( 400 SE2d 8) (1991); Watson v. Ga. State c. Credit Union, 201 Ga. App. 761 (1) ( 412 SE2d 286) (1991).Mountain Bound v. Alliant Food Service, 242 Ga. App. 557, 560 (3) ( 530 SE2d 272) (2000).