Aside from Caseys Case presentation indicating the details outlining the law. I would surmise from logical deduction that if there is "intent" to take advantage of a company through a contract regardless of whether one signs it one would have to take into account the fairness of the contract.

clearly there isn't anything fair about any of these loan sharking contracts. just because they sign a contract or agreement doesn't make it "legally" binding when the law which surrounds such an agreement has been broken from the beginning.

For the sake of a contract: it should be an agreement that is fair to both parties. Clearly this is not the case.