How have courts interpreted "stipulations" in a conditional clause in a contract?

Conditions precedent are disfavored, and this court has refused to construe "stipulations as conditions unless required to do so by unambiguous language." See Lockwood v. Wolf Corp., 629 F.2d 603, 610 (9th Cir.1980); see also Jones Associates v. Eastside Properties, 704 P.2d 681, 684, 41 Wash.App. 462 (1985). Typically, the condition qualifies a duty to perform, whereas here, Bjorklund alleges that the right to terminate is conditional. We will apply the principles governing construction of conditions precedent, nonetheless.