Roberts v. Roberts

I concur in the judgment of affirmance, but do not think that the assignment of error upon the direction of the verdict, to wit, that such direction was "contrary to law,” and "that the evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, the undisputed evidence disclosing that the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment for the stock in controversy or its value,” is sufficient to present the question whether the direction of the verdict was error. See Gailliard v. Johnston, 161 Ga. 17 (129 S. E. 434); Hightower v. Hightower, 159 Ga. 769 *460(9) (137 S. E. 103); Hamilton National Bank v.…