Since the defendant failed to demonstrate that the plaintiff was in privity with any of the defendants in the related foreclosure action (seePuryear v. Hutchinson, 175 A.D.3d 521, 522, 106 N.Y.S.3d 327 ), the court properly denied that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against it. A motion to dismiss on the ground that the action is barred by documentary evidence pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) may be "granted only where the documentary evidence utterly refutes the plaintiff's factual allegations, conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law" ( Goshen v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 98 N.Y.2d 314, 326, 746 N.Y.S.2d 858, 774 N.E.2d 1190 ; seeStewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 942, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714 ). "The New York Recording Act ( Real Property Law § 290 et seq. ), inter alia, protects a good faith purchaser for value from an unrecorded interest in a property, provided such a purchaser's interest is first to be duly recorded" ( 436 Franklin Realty, LLC v. U.S. Bank N.A., 188 A.D.3d 960, 961, 137 N.Y.S.3d 88 [internal quotation marks omitted]).

"'The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages'" (Ripa v Petrosyants, 203 A.D.3d 768, 769-770, quoting Stewart v Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941 [internal quotation marks omitted]). "'To state a cause of action to recover damages for a breach of contract, the plaintiff's allegations must identify the provisions of the contract that were breached'" (NFA Group v Lotus Research, Inc., 180 A.D.3d at 1061, quoting Barker v Time Warner Cable, Inc., 83 A.D.3d 750, 751 [alterations omitted]).

A motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) may be granted only if the documentary evidence submitted by the moving party utterly refutes the factual allegations and conclusively establishes a defense to the claims as a matter of law (see Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 98 N.Y.2d 314, 326; Gorbatov v Tsirelman, 155 A.D.3d at 837). "The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages" (Pierce Coach Line, Inc. v Port Wash. Union Free Sch. Dist., 213 A.D.3d 959, 960 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Stewart v Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941). Here, as alleged, the contract provided that the buyer's down payment must be returned if the lending institution failed to fund his loan, but the defendant refused to return the down payment after the lender failed to fund the loan.

The Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the cause of action alleging breach of contract. "The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages" ( Pierce Coach Line, Inc. v. Port Wash. Union Free Sch. Dist., 213 A.D.3d 959, 960, 185 N.Y.S.3d 187 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeStewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714 ). "[T]o state a cause of action to recover damages for a breach of contract, the plaintiff's allegations must identify the provisions of the contract that were breached" ( Pierce Coach Line, Inc. v. Port Wash. Union Free Sch. Dist., 213 A.D.3d at 960, 185 N.Y.S.3d 187 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeBarker v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., 83 A.D.3d 750, 751, 923 N.Y.S.2d 118 ).

" ‘The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages’ " ( Ripa v. Petrosyants, 203 A.D.3d 768, 160 N.Y.S.3d 658, quoting Stewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714 ). " ‘To state a cause of action to recover damages for a breach of contract, the plaintiff's allegations must identify the provisions of the contract that were breached’ "

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, with costs. The appeal must be dismissed as no appeal lies as of right from an order which directs a hearing to aid in the disposition of a motion, an order holding a motion in abeyance, or an order entered sua sponte (see CPLR 5701[a][2]; Sholes v Meagher, 100 N.Y.2d 333, 335; U.S. Bank N.A. v Mangroo, 200 A.D.3d 929, 930; Stewart v Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 942; Evan S. v Joseph R., 70 A.D.3d 668, 668), and leave to appeal has not been granted. IANNACCI, J.P., MILLER, MALTESE and DOWLING, JJ., concur.

"The plaintiffs are entitled to all favorable inferences that can be drawn from their pleadings" ( Davids v. State of New York, 159 A.D.3d at 989, 74 N.Y.S.3d 288 ; seeAristy–Farer v. State of New York, 29 N.Y.3d at 509, 58 N.Y.S.3d 877, 81 N.E.3d 360 ). "Thus, if the court determines that the plaintiffs are entitled to relief on any reasonable view of the facts stated, the inquiry is complete and the court must declare the complaint legally sufficient" ( Davids v. State of New York, 159 A.D.3d at 989, 74 N.Y.S.3d 288 ; seeAristy–Farer v. State of New York, 29 N.Y.3d at 509, 58 N.Y.S.3d 877, 81 N.E.3d 360 ). "The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are ‘the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages’ " ( Stewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714, quoting Liberty Equity Restoration Corp. v. Maeng–Soon Yun, 160 A.D.3d 623, 626, 75 N.Y.S.3d 52 ). Here, the complaint alleges that the plaintiff entered into an oral contract with the Petrosyants defendants, pursuant to which the plaintiff would receive a 50% equity interest in a proposed seafood restaurant in exchange for $120,000 and 50% of any additional renovation costs.

Moreover, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the moving defendants’ motion which was to dismiss the breach of contract cause of action insofar as asserted against Ofshtein by Egorov. The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are "the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages" ( Liberty Equity Restoration Corp. v. Maeng–Soon Yun, 160 A.D.3d 623, 626, 75 N.Y.S.3d 52 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeStewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714 ). Here, Egorov was not a party to or intended beneficiary of the escrow agreement that the plaintiffs allege Ofshtein breached, and thus, Egorov cannot recover for an alleged breach of this agreement.

"The essential elements of a breach of contract cause of action are 'the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance under the contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and resulting damages'" (Stewart v Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, quoting Liberty Equity Restoration Corp. v Maeng-Soon Yun, 160 A.D.3d 623, 626). Here, the complaint alleges that the plaintiff entered into an oral contract with the Petrosyants defendants, pursuant to which the plaintiff would receive a 50% equity interest in a proposed seafood restaurant in exchange for $120,000 and 50% of any additional renovation costs.

Accordingly, the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the cause of action to recover damages for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing should have been denied (seeTwinkle Play Corp. v. Alimar Props., Ltd., 186 A.D.3d 1447, 1449, 128 N.Y.S.3d 848 ; Tiffany Tower Condominium, LLC v. Insurance Co. of the Greater N.Y., 164 A.D.3d 860, 861–862, 84 N.Y.S.3d 167 ; 25 Bay Terrace Assoc., L.P. v. Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 144 A.D.3d at 667, 40 N.Y.S.3d 469 ). "The essential elements of a cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance pursuant to the contract, the defendant's breach of its contractual obligations, and damages resulting from the breach" ( WMC Realty Corp. v. City of Yonkers, 193 A.D.3d 1018, 1021–1022, 148 N.Y.S.3d 161 ; seeStewart v. Berger, 192 A.D.3d 940, 941, 140 N.Y.S.3d 714 ). "Damages awarded in a breach of contract action should place a plaintiff in the same position as it would have been if the agreement had not been violated" ( Chen v. Wen Fang Wang, 177 A.D.3d 694, 695, 111 N.Y.S.3d 703 [internal quotation marks omitted]; seeBrushton–Moira Cent. School Dist. v. Thomas Assoc., 91 N.Y.2d 256, 261, 669 N.Y.S.2d 520, 692 N.E.2d 551 ; MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Credit Suisse Sec. [USA] LLC, 165 A.D.3d 108, 114, 84 N.Y.S.3d 157 ; Stokoe v. E–Lionheart, LLC, 129 A.D.3d 703, 703, 11 N.Y.S.3d 199 ).