a clause is substantively unconscionable when it is too favorable to one party, so that the other party does not receive the fruits of the bargain. Courts investigating substantive unconscionability consider whether a contract or clause serves a reasonable purpose in the context or simply takes unfair advantage of a party 2 One classic example involves a clause in a contract that authorized a seller to reclaim all of the goods it sold to a purchaser if the purchaser defaulted on any single item- In the absence of a showing of the need for the clause because of unusual default risks, many courts would find such a clause unfair and unenforceable. 30 Enforcement of a substantively unconscionable term would unjustly enrich the favored party. For example, if a party pays $100 for a watch worth $5, I suspect most courts would find the seller's profit, not the product of entrepreneurial skill, but an unjust windfall Policy also plays an important role in both procedural and substantive unconscionability decisions. For example, courts consider whether a decision finding unconscionability overregulate and impinges on freedom of contract. Further, they must ask whether the dec will deter wrongful behavior or only drive transactors out of a market at the expense of those who want to contract Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co, 350 F. 2d 445 (D. C Cir. 1965)7 A clause is substantively unconscionable when it is too favorable to one party, so that the other party does not receive the fruits of the bargain.27 Courts investigating substantive unconscionability consider whether a contract or clause serves a reasonable purpose in the context or simply takes unfair advantage of a party.28 One classic example involves a clause in a contract that authorized a seller to reclaim all of the goods it sold to a purchaser if the purchaser defaulted on any single item.29 In the absence of a showing of the need for the clause because of unusual default risks, many courts would find such a clause unfair and unenforceable.30 Enforcement of a substantively unconscionable term would unjustly enrich the favored party. For example, if a party pays $100 for a watch worth $5, I suspect most courts would find the seller's profit, not the product of entrepreneurial skill, but an unjust windfall. Policy also plays an important role in both procedural and substantive unconscionability decisions. For example, courts consider whether a decision finding unconscionability overregulates and impinges on freedom of contract. Further, they must ask whether the decision will deter wrongful behavior or only drive transactors out of a market at the expense of those who want to contract. 27 Id. 28 Id. 29 Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co., 350 F. 2d 445 (D.C. Cir. 1965). 30 Id