I'm confused about this..
In a consideration analysis, are we supposed to discuss (1) benefit to promisor/detriment to promisee and (2) if it was bargained for FOR each promise?
My Prof. says at the beginning of the analysis, you need to find out who's promise you are talking about.
Which one is proper:
1) There is adequate consideration because A's promise to B involves (1) and (2). In addition, B's promise to A involves (1) and (2).
2) There is adequate consideration because there is (1) and (2).
I would normally go with 2 but my Prof. notes confused me...