DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable by the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed their first cause of action in which they claimed that by attaching rent stabilization riders to certain leases, and by tendering rent renewal leases using rent stabilization forms, the defendant contractually agreed to subject the appellants' apartments to the Rent Stabilization Law ( see Mayflower Assoc. v. Gray, NYLJ, Mar. 1, 1994, at 21, col 1 [App Term, 1st Dept, Parness, J.P.]; 7 Dunham Place Realty v. Arndt, 189 Misc.2d 710, 715).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., COZIER, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.