California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Higdon v. Superior Court, 227 Cal.App.3d 1667, 278 Cal.Rptr. 588 (Cal. App. 1991):
Real parties and petitioners agree that the correct standard of review is that the trial court's decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. (River West, Inc. v. Nickel (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1297, 1302, 234 Cal.Rptr. 33; Elliott v. McFarland Unified School Dist. (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 562, 567, 211 Cal.Rptr. 802.)
Real parties, however, go on to say the respondent court's decision cannot be questioned since no statement of decision was requested by counsel [227 Cal.App.3d 1671] at the time of the hearing. This reasoning clearly fails; Lavine v. Hospital of the Good Samaritan (1985) 169 Cal.App.3d 1019, 1026, 215 Cal.Rptr. 708, held that a statement of decision "is neither required nor available upon decision of a motion."