Affirmed. Given that the standard of review for a motion for continuance is abuse of discretion, see Cargile-Schrage v. Schrage, 908 So.2d 528, 529 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (“[N]o judge in his right mind would have denied the continuance.”), it certainly was not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny a continuance in a case that had been pending for ten years.