What is the standard of review for discovery orders?

Other than setting forth the standard of review for discovery orders, plaintiff makes no argument why the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motions to compel further response to special interrogatories and request for production of documents. "It is a fundamental rule of appellate review that the judgment appealed from is presumed correct and '"'all intendments and presumptions are indulged in favor of its correctness.'" [Citation.]' [Citation.] An appellant must provide an argument and legal authority to support his contentions. This burden requires more than a mere assertion that the judgment is wrong. 'Issues do not have a life of their own: If they are not raised or supported by argument or citation to authority, [they are] . . . waived.' [Citation.] It is not our place to construct theories or arguments to undermine the judgment and defeat the presumption of correctness. When an appellant fails to raise a point, or asserts it but fails to support it with reasoned argument and citations to authority, we treat the point as waived. [Citation.]" (Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 836, 852.) As plaintiff has failed to present cogent appellate arguments supported by legal authority on this discovery issue, we may properly treat any appellate issues as having been forfeited.