Refer to Fact Pattern 12-1A. A court is most likely to evaluate the adequacy of consideration if (Fact Pattern 12-2A Cut-Rate Construction Company (CCC) begins building a restaurant for Diners Restaurants, Inc., but after two months demands an extra $100,000. Diners agrees to pay). a thing exchanged has no intangible value to one of the parties. something exchanged is not of direct economic or financial value. the items exchanged were of unequal value. there is a gross disparity in the value of the consideration exchanged