held, in a variety of contexts, that “[t]here is no magic in mere nomenclature, and the inquiry of the Court is always directed to substance and not to form.” (Punctuation omitted.) W. E. Heller & Co. v. Aetna Business Credit, 158 Ga. App. 249, 257 (280 SE2d 144) (1981). 10 (Punctuation omitted.) Rogers v. State, 224 Ga. App. 359, 360 (2) (480 SE2d 368) (1997). 11 Trombetta, supra at 488. 12 Patterson, supra at 206. 13 Trombetta, supra at 489. 14 Id. at 483. 15 Id. at 489-490. 16 (Punctuation omitted.) Tribble v. State, 248 Ga. 274, 275 (1) (280 SE2d 352) (1981). 17 Black’s Law Dictionary (5th ed.). 18 Trombetta, supra at 488. 19 166 Ill.2d 310 (652 NE2d 288) (1995). 20 (Citations omitted.) Id. at 292. 21 Id. at 291. 22 See Sisson v. State, 181 Ga. App. 784, 788 (353 SE2d 836) (1987) (<HOLDING>). 23 Trombetta, supra at 487 (“when evidence
recognizing that independent analysis is  the only means by which the defendant can defend against expert testimony by the state  holding expert testimony remedies speculation by the court holding that excluding expert testimony was harmless and did not affect the jury verdict because the subject matter of the testimony was only one factor and by no means a determinative one recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state holding that the admissibility of expert testimony was governed by state law