Final answer:
To avoid contractual obligations based on unconscious ability, a litigant must demonstrate unconscionability, where a contract is so unfair to one party that it is deemed unenforceable. It involves procedural issues like impropriety during contract formation, as well as substantive ones like the actual terms of the agreement.
Step-by-step explanation:
A litigant who wishes to avoid contractual obligations based on unconscious ability must show unconscionability. Unconscionability is a doctrine in contract law that allows a court to deny the enforcement of a contract or a clause within it if the terms are excessively unfair to one party. This could happen if one party had significantly more power than the other during negotiations or if the terms are outrageously unfair to the point where they "shock the conscience".
Some indicators of unconscionability include lack of meaningful choice on the part of one party, and terms that unreasonably favor one party over the other. To establish unconscionability, a litigant would typically have to demonstrate both procedural and substantive elements. Procedural unconscionability relates to improprieties during the formation of the contract, such as deceit, while substantive unconscionability refers to the actual terms of the contract itself.