Opinion ID: 2570200
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: NPPI's Current Understanding of Yakutat's Option To Purchase Is Irrelevant.

Text: NPPI argues that the superior court erred in finding that NPPI was fully aware that a clause giving Yakutat an option to purchase structural improvements included the option to purchase equipment such as compressors and condensers. NPPI refers us to the testimony of an NPPI vice president who testified about his understanding of trade fixtures. But, as Yakutat contends, the witness was not a participant in the Sitka Sound transactions that preceded NPPI's 1996 purchase of Sitka Sound. We agree with Yakutat that what is relevant is the parties' intentions when they entered into the leases, not the subjective belief of NPPI personnel during litigation years later. [50] A contract is enforceable in accordance with the meaning the parties attach to a contract term at the time they enter into the contract. [51] NPPI's current understanding of the lease is irrelevant. [52]