concurring specially.
Under the controlling authority of Bandy v. Hosp. Auth. of Walker County, 174 Ga. App. 556, 557 (1) (b) (332 SE2d 46), the “absence of a signature by an attorney in compliance with Rule 1-203 [and 1-204], Rules of the State Bar of Georgia and OCGA § 9-11-11 (a) was a defect which [plaintiff-appellants] timely cure[d] by amending the complaint to add the name and signature of a Georgia attorney [in full compliance -with the applicable State Bar Rules], Because no pre-trial order had been entered, the trial court erred [in] refusing to allow [plaintiffs to] amend. OCGA § 9-11-15 (a); Downs [v. Jones, 140 Ga. App. 752, 753 (1) (231 SE2d 816)].” Consequently, the majority correctly holds the trial court in the case sub judice erred in dismissing the complaint. I do not join in the characterization of that complaint as being only “voidable,” as opposed to “void.” It is enough to say the pleading defect is amendable, and was, in this instance, timely cured. I respectfully concur in the judgment only.