A Table Split Across Pages: Logging Rows That Continue on the Next Page

A client's bank statement has an activity table that runs off the foot of a file page and onto the next. That's a table split across pages. In this method, the Preparer logs each table that runs over a page break by file page, by hand, logs each row the pages print as continuing, with its text copied word for word, logs a row whose continuation the pages don't show as "Continuation unclear", and asks the client. Each log line, and each entry whose citation the Preparer checked against a log line, stays open for the Reviewer's decision.

The plugin drafts; the Firm's preparer prepares; the Reviewer signs off. Every step here is one the Firm writes and keeps, in whatever systems the Firm already uses, and the Firm can adapt the document-handling steps; the Reviewer's sign-off on the whole file stays as it is.

This piece states no rule about what a split row's figures add up to, or which page's figure is the right one, and works out no totals.

Missing pages, pages out of order, or a table that runs on

Where a table stops at a page break and the page it goes on to isn't in the file, the missing-page steps in missing pages in a client document apply.

Where the file pages aren't in printed order, the page-order steps in pages out of order apply.

Here the pages are in the file, and a table's rows run over a page break.

What counts, in this method

In this method, the Preparer reads every page of the document and logs a table on the split-table log when all of these are true:

• A table's printed rows run past the foot of a file page and go on at the top of the next page.
• The Preparer looks only at what the pages print.

In this method, the Preparer logs a row as continuing where the pages print it that way, such as a "continued" label. Where the pages don't show whether a row goes on, or the print at the break can't be made out, the Preparer logs it "Continuation unclear" with a plain note of what shows, and asks the client.

The split-table log

In this method, the Preparer logs on the file index, by hand, each page break a table runs over on its own table line, and each row at a break that continues, or may continue, on its own row line.

The Preparer copies row text, including any figure a row prints, word for word, and doesn't join the text from both pages or work out a figure the pages don't print.

In this method, the Preparer keeps the document as it came in. Any further document steps follow the Firm's own policy.

Citing a row that continues on the next page

In this method, the Firm's instructions ask for the document, table heading, file page, printed page or "none printed", and where a logged row goes on, in each drafted entry's citation. The Preparer checks each citation by hand. A pattern to adapt:

"[document]; table [heading or none printed]; file page [page]; printed page [page or none printed]; continuation [file page, none or Can't tell]"

A line for the Firm's AI instructions

In this method, the Firm adds a line, in its own words, to its instructions for the drafting pass on these documents. A version to adapt:

"[document]. The Firm's instructions ask for each entry's citation by document, table heading or none printed, file page, printed page or none printed, and continuation: file page, none or Can't tell, and for no unprinted row text and no text joined from both pages; the Preparer checks by hand."

The line is the Firm's wording, not a promise about what any drafting software does. The Preparer still checks each entry by hand.

Asking the client about a row that may continue

In this method, the Preparer asks the client about each row logged "Continuation unclear". The Firm can adapt this message:

Hi Jane Doe, thanks for sending [document]. In the table [table heading], the row at the foot of file page [file page] shows "[row text, word for word, or a plain note of what shows]". We can't tell from the pages whether it goes on at file page [file page]. Could you tell us what you know about this row, or send another copy if you have one? Thanks, [Preparer name] at [Firm]

Marking entries drafted from a table on the split-table log

In this method, the Preparer marks by hand, in the entry's note, every drafted entry with one or more of these marks.

When the client answers

If the client says what they know about the row, the Preparer quotes the answer word for word on the log line and in the note of each entry the Preparer checked against it, marked "Client answer noted"; the log line keeps "Continuation unclear".

If the client sends another copy, the Preparer logs it on its own file-index line and follows the missing-page or page-order steps linked above where they apply; the log lines for the copy on file stay as written.

If the client can't say or doesn't answer, the Preparer notes that on the log line; any further document steps follow the Firm's own policy.

Whatever the client answers, each log line, and each entry the Preparer checked against it, stays open for the Reviewer's decision.

The pre-review check

In this method, the Preparer reads the file against this check and sends it to the Reviewer.

• The Preparer checks each logged page break has its own table line naming who logged it.
• The Preparer checks each row line shows its file page, printed page or "none printed", continuation or "Can't tell", and verbatim text or "Can't read".
• The Preparer checks each "Continuation unclear" line describes what shows and names the client question.
• The Preparer checks any row text or figure absent from the pages appears only in the client's quoted answer.
• The Preparer checks the Firm's instructions include each logged document's line.
• The Preparer checks each entry's citation against the pattern, and checks each entry has one or more of the Preparer's marks, set by hand.
• The Preparer checks each client answer is quoted on its log line and in the notes of the entries checked against it.

Who logs and who decides

The Firm names people for the document-handling steps.

A mark on an entry, or a log line's status, tells the Reviewer where to look; it isn't a sign-off. The Reviewer decides on each entry and each log line; the Reviewer signs off on the whole file, split-table log included. No file is done without the Reviewer's sign-off.

A Doe example

The names and file below are made up for illustration.

Jane Doe, a synthetic client, sends a Doe Bank statement. Alex Doe is the Preparer; Pat Doe is the Reviewer.

Alex reads every file page. The table headed "Account Activity" runs over each page break in the statement. At the break after the opening page, the top row of the next page prints "Transfer to Doe Savings (continued)". At a later break, the bottom row prints "Doe Hardware", and Alex can't tell from the pages whether it goes on.

Alex logs a table line for each break, a "Row continues" line for the transfer row with its text copied word for word, and a "Continuation unclear" line for the Doe Hardware row.

Alex adds the Firm's line and runs the pass. Alex also messages Jane Doe about the Doe Hardware row. Alex checks each citation by hand. Alex marks every entry: transfer row, "Cites a split row"; Doe Hardware row, "Cites an unclear row"; every other entry, "Cited by file page".

Jane writes that the Doe Hardware row goes on. Alex quotes Jane Doe's reply on that log line and in those entries' notes, marked "Client answer noted". Each log line and entry stays open for the Reviewer's decision.

Alex runs the pre-review check and sends the file to Pat, who decides on each log line and each entry, and signs off on the whole file.

Where TracePrep fits

We've built a TracePrep plugin that drafts these steps in your Firm's workflow, while your preparer decides and your Reviewer signs off. Join the waitlist and we'll tell you when plugin access opens.

Get on the list for plugin access

This is general information, not tax or legal advice. In TracePrep's workflow, the plugin drafts, the Firm's preparer prepares, and the Firm's Reviewer signs off. Access to the plugin is by waitlist. Keep client data inside the systems your Firm has approved.