so the question is how far to push collection of damages.

No doubt about the Dec 1 date.......with a written lease, and absent any exercise of other termination clauses........Dec 1 is locked in rock.

Entrance to the property for purposes of tillage, since it was by authorization of the landlord, would probably NOT be trespass.

The landlord merely screwed up.............at least that would be the position I would take until other events proved the contrary.

Resultantly, the question is whether or not damages occurred because of the entrance, and if so, how much, and if quantified, is it worth the effort to collect-----financially and emotionally?

I look at probably more contracts than the average person, and see very, very few which I deem to be "complete".  In fact, many years ago I incurred the wrath of the "local el premo" elite attorney when I had the audacity (sp?) to suggest that his contract that was drawn for a mutual client was horse puckey.............his comment--- "I define my terms in court!"--------needless to say, I learned a little that day.

Therefore, even with a "good" contract, there will be ambiguities........not because of poor attorneys, greedy attorneys, parties trying to "hook" someone, etc etc but merely because of human frailities..............and hence my agreement with Greg and PB.........doing business with the wicked will only result in heartache, regardless of the amount of paper consumed in the typewriter.

There should have been more "good guy" communication, to help "define" ambiguities in the written contract............before it got to the confrontational stage.........

but since there was not, then a determination of damages is necessary------end of story.

And, I think Tim is trying to say that..............there should have been more communication.......and I agree.  And, from PB's postings in the past, I would bet that with or without a written contract, in the event of unforeseen changes in circumstances..........ie those events which neither party would have necessarily contemplated, as evidenced by having their attorneys put procedures for handling into such writing................he would have been on the phone saying hey........I reread the contract, don't see a definite procedure, what about doing so and so?

That's called being businesslike.............living with the obvious provisions, but being astute enough to recognize nothing is perfect.

Farming is somewhat unique in that in the vast number of "city" businesses, the transactions with someone are started on paper so that both parties can merely handle the flow easier within their records systems...........whereas in farming, a vast bulk of the paper is started with the "other" party, and not the "farmer".........or there might be no paperwork until a check is cut.

Farmer calls the elevator and inquires as to the prices..........and says I'll sell x  bushels.  The elevator writes up the order...........farmer does not issue a paper order to the elevator.  (Cargill------merely one which I have had experience with------issues contracts for signatures when farmer sells.........but most "city" businesses which initiate the transaction would issue the contract, or "order")  Etc etc etc.

We usually try to send a "confirming" letter to anyone with whom we have initiated a "non paper", or "telephone" transaction-----------example...we just bot some seed out of state, with an elevator we have never done business with before------totally over the phone.  They were not going to issue any "paper" on the deal..........but I did.............just to make sure that there were not any more communication problems than necessary..........and the letter was sent certified........just to make sure our illustrious postal system did not lose it (another topic for another day, and yes I realize we have a great system, comparatively speaking.........but dumb things are still done). 

Such procedure also forces me to rethink the deal, just so I can put it down in "proper" fashion on paper, which is good because it causes me to rethink the deal.  And, such a device also has a secondary benefit of causing the recipient to double think the deal........if for no other reason than the issuing party took the time to put it in writing, and therefore "I guess I better read it just to make sure"..........which I think is most appropriate.

A written device will not solve all the issues...........but it sure the hell will cause everyone to be a little more attentive to the twists.

The tenant needs to do a sitdown............and "negotiate" his damages............and do a better contract next time, which contemplates more possibles.  If nothing else transpires from that next-time more detailed contract, it will force into the open more of the thoughts of the other side........at the front end.........while parties are still friendly.