With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". contemporaneous affidavit filing requirement of OCGA § 9-11-9.1 (a) would be negated if a plaintiff was allowed to bring an ordinary negligence claim without an affidavit, and then later add claims for professional negligence after the expiration of the statute of limitation. Fales, however, is inapplicable to the instant situation. There, the plaintiff originally brought a medical malpractice claim, but failed to attach the requisite expert affidavit. Fales, supra, 263 Ga. App. at 461. The plaintiff instead filed an amended complaint that included an expert affidavit, claiming that OCGA § 9-11-9.1 allowed an amended complaint to cure a failure to file an affidavit. Id. at 461-462. This Court rejected the plaintiff’s argument. Id. at 462; see also Roberson, supra, 302 Ga. App. at 407 (<HOLDING>). Here, on the other hand, Engler did not raise

A: holding amendment to statute of limitations was a procedural amendment to be applied retroactively in a medical malpractice case
B: holding that the ada does not create a remedy for medical malpractice
C: recognizing that a plaintiff must produce a medical expert to testify as to causation in all but the most selfevident medical malpractice actions
D: holding that ocga  91191 does not allow a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice to cure a failure to attach an expert affidavit through amendment
D.