Under Tennessee law, "[c]ausation is a distinct element of negligence, and `[n]o claim for negligence can succeed in the absence of' it." Rivers v. Nw. Tenn. Human Res. Agency, No. W2009-01454-COA-R3-CV, 2010 WL 1539838, at *5 (Tenn. Ct. App. Apr. 19, 2010) (quoting Kilpatrick v. Bryant, 868 S.W.2d 594, 598 (Tenn. 1993)). "Causation, or cause in fact, means that the injury or harm would not have occurred `but for' the defendant's negligent conduct."

2010)(case citations omitted). The Candidate contends that, since there was no oral testimony, the presumption of correctness normally accorded to factual findings by Tenn. R. App. P. 13(d) does not apply. The Candidate is mistaken; the lack of oral testimony affects only the degree of deference that we show to the trial court's evaluation of testimony as we explained in Rivers v. Northwest Tennessee Human Resource Agency, No. W2009-01454-COA-R3-CV, 2010 WL 1539838 at *4-5 (Tenn. Ct. App. W.S., filed April 19, 2010): Since this case was tried by the trial court sitting without a jury, we review the trial court's findings of fact de novo affording [sic] a presumption of correctness unless the evidence preponderates to the contrary.