not be said that Jamison received adequate consideration as an employee of Regency’s partner Marathon, plaintiffs undisputed reliance on the Guaranty suffices. “A contract of guaranty is supported by a sufficient consideration if it is based on some benefit which passes to the principal obli-gor or guarantor or some detriment or injury to the guarantee.” 38A C.J.S. Guaranty § 29. Moreover, “[w]here the contract of guaranty is made before or at the same time as the principal contract, and both contracts form parts of the same transaction, one consideration is sufficient for both the principal and the collateral contract and there need not be any other consideration than that moving between the guarantee and the principal obli-gor-” Id. at § 27. Cf. Great Falls Bank, 622 A.2d at 1359 (<HOLDING>). The court grants summary judgment as to
holding that the trustee did not have constructive knowledge of an improperly executed mortgage because ohio law provided that an improperly executed mortgage does not provide constructive notice to a subsequent bona fide purchaser holding that where guaranty and mortgage were not executed simultaneously even a trifling inconvenience to the guarantee constitutes sufficient consideration holding that plaintiffs forbearance from suit against subsidiary was sufficient consideration to support defendants guaranty of defendants subsidiarys preexisting debt holding that a preexisting or antecedent debt may constitute sufficient consideration to support a mortgage holding that incurring a legal detriment in and of itself constitutes sufficient consideration