Baker v. Zingelman , 259 Pa. Super. 441 ( 1978 )

SPAETH, Judge,

concurring:

I submit that the majority treats “ambiguity” and “mistake” as synonyms. In my view, there was ambiguity because the surveyors had to resort to using landmarks not included in the deed, and mistake because the parties to the deed thought that all the buildings were included, but they weren’t. On either ground—ambiguity or mistake—parol evidence was admissible.