Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of the jury that the stock was worthless both at the time of the sale and at the time of the tender, or, in other words, that the sale was without consideration.”). See generally 17 Williston on Contracts §51:18 (4th ed.) (discussing the defense of failure of consideration for the sale of securities and noting that, “[i]f the parties are dealing at arm’s length... and neither buyer nor seller is guilty of fraud, the defense of failure of consideration will not, by the weight of authority, prevail, unless the stock or other security had neither a market value, nor an intrinsic value both on the day of the contract and on the day of tender”). 10 Coast Scopitone, 127 Ga. App. at 126 (1); see also Jones v. Dixie O’Brien Div., O’Brien Corp., 174 Ga. App. 67, 68 (1) (329 SE2d 256) (1985) ; Fagala v. Morrison, 146 Ga. App. 377, 377 (1)
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding testimony that inter alia paint at issue was defective and of no value whatsoever was sufficient evidence that the consideration had totally failed punctuation omitted
B. holding that there was no evidence of market value where owners testimony affirmatively showed that it was based on personal value
C. holding inter alia that common law claims were preempted
D. holding that the trial court properly excluded evidence that other persons had a motive to kill the victims because inter alia such evidence was speculative
E. holding inter alia that expert testimony was not required to prove damages for emotional distress in an abuse of process claim
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.