What is the standard of review for a request for a continuance?

When the ruling on a request for continuance is reviewable in an appeal from the judgment, the standard of review is abuse of discretion. (Futrell v. Payday California, Inc. (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 1419, 1438.) Even if the continuance orders may be reviewed in this appeal, we have not found any argument in Father's briefs that demonstrates the trial court abused its discretion by continuing the hearing. The August 8, 2017 order indicates both parties and Father's attorney were unavailable or absent from the hearing. The September 27, 2017 order indicates Mother and Father were present, but Father's attorney was not. A continuance was ordered so Father's attorney could be present. Father has not presented any argument, supported by legal authority and facts in the record, showing that the trial court abused its discretion by continuing the hearing so the parties and Father's attorney could be present; he also has not demonstrated that he was prejudiced in any way by the continuances.

Consequently, Father has not established any prejudicial error in the first two orders from which he appealed.