In Skyview Holdings LLC v. Cunningham, 13 Misc 3d 102 (AT 1st Dept. 2006) the Appellate Term First Department reversed the Civil Court for dismissing the proceeding and applying the Landaverde rule to notices of notices of nonrenewal under RSC 2542.2 (c)(3), served by mail. The Appellate Term "declined. . .to adopt a blanket rule requiring landlords to add five days to statutory notice periods upon the mailing of any and all notices 'required by rent regulations'. Id. at 103. In finding that "the Landaverde rule was meant to be confined specifically and narrowly to the 10-day cure notice there involved", the Appellate Term focused on the fact that a notice of nonrenewal, unlike a notice to cure, does not trigger an obligation by the tenant to cure the lease violation within a definitive time frame, or suffer a forfeiture of the tenancy. Id. Therefore the court continued, "a tenant who is served by mail with a notice of nonrenewal...even if that delivery is unusually delayed, cannot be reasonably said to have been 'disadvantaged by the owner's choice of service method'" Id.