In these situations, the typical manner of determining whether a trial court exercised its independent judgment is to compare the trial court's oral ruling with its written order. See SecurAmerica Bus. Credit v. Southland Transp. Co., No. W2016-02505-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 1100958, at *7 (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2018). Small differences, such as the incorporation of "facts and reasoning expounded upon by the court" will not prevent a finding that the written order reflects the deliberation of the trial court.
. Co., LLC, No. W2016-02505-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 1100958, at *12 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018) (citing Myint, 970 S.W.2d at 927). That statute provides in pertinent part, "[T]he time from which interest is to be computed shall be the day when the debt is payable, unless another day be fixed in the contract itself."
. M2017-02399-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 4961527, at *2 (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 15, 2018) (quoting SecurAmerica Bus. Credit v. Southland Transp. Co., No. W2016-02505-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 1100958, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2018)). Because the limited record before us contains no transcript or statement of the evidence, we are unable to determine whether the trial court even made an oral ruling, much less compare such a ruling with the written final decree.
In cases tried without a jury, findings of fact will be reviewed "de novo upon the record of the trial court" with a presumption of correctness, unless the evidence preponderates otherwise. Tenn. R. App. P. 13(d); SecurAmerica Bus. Credit v. Southland Transp. Co., No. W2016-02505-COA-R3-CV, 2018 WL 1100958, at *5 (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 27, 2018). We review the trial court's conclusions of law de novo with no presumption of correctness.