-----BEGIN PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE----- Proc-Type: 2001,MIC-CLEAR Originator-Name: webmaster@www.sec.gov Originator-Key-Asymmetric: MFgwCgYEVQgBAQICAf8DSgAwRwJAW2sNKK9AVtBzYZmr6aGjlWyK3XmZv3dTINen TWSM7vrzLADbmYQaionwg5sDW3P6oaM5D3tdezXMm7z1T+B+twIDAQAB MIC-Info: RSA-MD5,RSA, NfBm7NOeQFROEdqNCpY4IW3X3J8kyAZ9qrdROkSuQBixXgPKyKJVO1gSxYkBFvc4 b3mKZbXX6KIe/qA3KdFB0Q== 0000711642-01-500214.txt : 20020410 0000711642-01-500214.hdr.sgml : 20020410 ACCESSION NUMBER: 0000711642-01-500214 CONFORMED SUBMISSION TYPE: 10QSB PUBLIC DOCUMENT COUNT: 1 CONFORMED PERIOD OF REPORT: 20010930 FILED AS OF DATE: 20011113 FILER: COMPANY DATA: COMPANY CONFORMED NAME: ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES LTD III CENTRAL INDEX KEY: 0000720460 STANDARD INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION: REAL ESTATE [6500] IRS NUMBER: 953903984 STATE OF INCORPORATION: CA FISCAL YEAR END: 1231 FILING VALUES: FORM TYPE: 10QSB SEC ACT: 1934 Act SEC FILE NUMBER: 000-13192 FILM NUMBER: 1781863 BUSINESS ADDRESS: STREET 1: 55 BEATTIE PLACE STREET 2: PO BOX 1089 CITY: GREENVILLE STATE: SC ZIP: 29602 BUSINESS PHONE: 3037578101 MAIL ADDRESS: STREET 1: 55 BEATTIE PLACE STREET 2: P.O. BOX 1089 CITY: GREENVILLE STATE: SC ZIP: 29602 10QSB 1 aipl3.txt AIPL3 FORM 10-QSB--QUARTERLY OR TRANSITIONAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Quarterly or Transitional Report U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-QSB (Mark One) [X] QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2001 [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _________to _________ Commission file number 0-13192 ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter) California 95-3903984 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 55 Beattie Place, P.O. Box 1089 Greenville, South Carolina 29602 (Address of principal executive offices) (864) 239-1000 (Issuer's telephone number) Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No___ PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS a) ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data) September 30, 2001
Assets Cash and cash equivalents $ 235 Receivables and deposits 4 Other assets 14 Investment property: Land $ 657 Buildings and related personal property 4,381 5,038 Less accumulated depreciation (3,580) 1,458 $ 1,711 Liabilities and Partners' (Deficit) Capital Liabilities Accounts payable $ 9 Tenant security deposit liabilities 19 Accrued property taxes 31 Due to Affiliates 12 Other liabilities 92 Partners' (Deficit) Capital General partners $ (16) Limited partners (86,738 units issued and outstanding) 1,564 1,548 $ 1,711 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
b) ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Unaudited) (in thousands, except per unit data)
Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended September 30, September 30, 2001 2000 2001 2000 Revenues: Rental income $ 205 $ 215 $ 624 $ 638 Other income 11 12 37 68 Total revenues 216 227 661 706 Expenses: Operating 95 86 259 260 General and administrative 45 41 115 106 Depreciation 59 66 192 201 Property taxes 8 9 32 30 Total expenses 207 202 598 597 Income from continuing operations 9 25 63 109 Loss from discontinued operations -- (50) -- (50) Net income (loss) $ 9 $ (25) $ 63 $ 59 Net income allocated to general partners (1%) $ -- $ -- $ 1 $ 1 Net income (loss) allocated to limited partners (99%) 9 (25) 62 58 $ 9 $ (25) $ 63 $ 59 Per limited partnership unit: Income from continuing operations $ .10 $ .29 $.71 $1.25 Loss from discontinued operations -- (.58) -- (.58) Net income (loss) $ .10 $(.29) $.71 $ .67 Distributions per limited partnership unit $ -- $ -- $2.23 $25.17 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
c) ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' (DEFICIT) CAPITAL (Unaudited) (in thousands, except unit data)
Limited Partnership General Limited Units Partners Partners Total Original capital contributions 86,920 $ 1 $43,460 $43,461 Partners' (deficit) capital at December 31, 2000 86,738 $ (15) $ 1,695 $ 1,680 Distributions to partners -- (2) (193) (195) Net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 -- 1 62 63 Partners' (deficit) capital at September 30, 2001 86,738 $ (16) $ 1,564 $ 1,548 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
d) ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Unaudited) (in thousands)
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2001 2000 Cash flows from operating activities: Net income $ 63 $ 59 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 192 201 Change in accounts: Receivables and deposits 25 135 Other assets (6) (4) Accounts payable (14) (30) Tenant security deposit liabilities (4) 3 Accrued property taxes (7) (8) Due to Affiliates (21) -- Other liabilities 42 (94) Net cash provided by operating activities 270 262 Cash flows from investing activities: Property improvements and replacements (46) (35) Cash flows from financing activities: Distributions to partners (195) (2,205) Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents 29 (1,978) Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 206 2,253 Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $ 235 $ 275 See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
e) ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) Note A - Basis of Presentation The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Angeles Income Properties, Ltd. III (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-QSB and Item 310(b) of Regulation S-B. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of Angeles Realty Corporation II (the "Managing General Partner"), all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2001, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2001. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2000. The Managing General Partner is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apartment Investment and Management Company ("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust. Principles of Consolidation: The consolidated financial statements of the Partnership include its 99% limited partnership interests in Poplar Square AIP III, L.P. and Poplar Square GP LP. Poplar Square GP LP is the general partner of Poplar Square AIP III and the Managing General Partner is the general partner of Poplar Square GP LP. Both general partners of the consolidated partnerships may be removed by the Registrant; therefore, the partnerships are controlled and consolidated by the Partnership. All significant interpartnership balances have been eliminated. Segment Reporting: Statement of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 131, "Disclosure about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information" established standards for the way that public business enterprises report information about operating segments in annual financial statements and requires that those enterprises report selected information about operating segments in interim financial reports. It also established standards for related disclosures about products and services, geographic areas, and major customers. As defined in SFAS No. 131, the Partnership has only one reportable segment. The Managing General Partner believes that segment-based disclosures will not result in a more meaningful presentation than the consolidated financial statements as currently presented. Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the Managing General Partner and its affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership activities. The Partnership Agreement provides (i) for certain payments to affiliates for services and (ii) reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by affiliates on behalf of the Partnership. The following payments were made to the Managing General Partner and affiliates during the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 2000: 2001 2000 (in thousands) Property management fees (included in operating expenses) $ 33 $ 34 Reimbursement for services of affiliates (included in general and administrative expenses and investment property 68 41 Partnership management fees (included in general and administrative expense) 16 -- Affiliates of the Managing General Partner are entitled to receive 5% of gross receipts from the Registrant's residential property as compensation for providing property management services. The Registrant paid to such affiliates approximately $33,000 and $34,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 2000, respectively. An affiliate of the Managing General Partner received reimbursement of accountable administrative expenses amounting to approximately $68,000 and $41,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 2000, respectively. Included in these amounts at September 30, 2001, and 2000 are reimbursement of approximately $17,000 and $2,000, respectively, for construction oversight costs. The Partnership Agreement provides for a fee equal to 10% of "net cash flow from operations", as defined in the Partnership Agreement to be paid to the Managing General Partner for executive and administrative management services. This fee is calculated and accrued quarterly. At September 30, 2001, the Partnership had accrued approximately $12,000 which is included in due to affiliates on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 40,934 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 47.19% of the outstanding Units at September 30, 2001. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will make one or more additional offers to acquire additional limited partnership interests in the Partnership for cash or in exchange for units in the operating partnership of AIMCO. Under the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters which would include voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 47.19% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a position to influence all such voting decisions with respect to the Registrant. When voting on matters, AIMCO would in all likelihood vote the Units it acquired in a manner favorable to the interest of the Managing General Partner because of its affiliation with the Managing General Partner. Note C - Distributions The Partnership declared and paid cash distributions from operations of approximately $195,000 (approximately $193,000 to the limited partners or $2.23 per limited partnership unit) during the nine months ended September 30, 2001. During the nine months ended September 30, 2000, the Partnership paid a cash distribution from the net sale proceeds of Poplar Square Shopping Center, which sold in December 1999, of approximately $1,205,000 (approximately $1,193,000 to the limited partners or $13.76 per limited partnership unit) and from operations of approximately $1,000,000 (approximately $990,000 to the limited partners or $11.41 per limited partnership unit). Note D - Legal Proceedings In March 1998, several putative unitholders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain general partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which, together with a demurrer filed by other defendants, is currently scheduled to be heard on November 15, 2001. The Court has set the matter for trial in January 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. The matters are currently scheduled to be heard on November 15, 2001. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. The Partnership is unaware of any other pending or outstanding litigation that is not of a routine nature arising in the ordinary course of business. ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATIONS The matters discussed in this Form 10-QSB contain certain forward-looking statements and involve risks and uncertainties (including changing market conditions, competitive and regulatory matters, etc.) detailed in the disclosures contained in this Form 10-QSB and the other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission made by the Registrant from time to time. The discussion of the Registrant's business and results of operations, including forward-looking statements pertaining to such matters, does not take into account the effects of any changes to the Registrant's business and results of operation. Accordingly, actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those identified herein. The Partnership's investment property consists of one apartment complex. The following table sets forth the average occupancy of the property for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 and 2000: Average Occupancy Property 2001 2000 Lake Forest Apartments 91% 94% Brandon, Mississippi The decrease in occupancy at Lake Forest Apartments is due to increased competition in the market area and a number of tenants purchasing homes. Results from Operations The Registrant's net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2001 was approximately $63,000 compared to net income of approximately $59,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2000. The Registrant's net income for the three months ended September 30, 2001 was approximately $9,000 compared to a net loss of approximately $25,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2000. The increase in net income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2001 was attributable to the recognition of a net loss from discontinued operations during 2000, slightly offset by a decrease in total revenues. Total expenses remained relatively constant. Poplar Square was the only commercial property owned by the Partnership and represented one segment of the Partnership's operations. Due to the sale of this property in December 1999, the results of the commercial segment have been shown as loss from discontinued operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2000. The decrease in total revenues for the three and nine months ended September 31, 2001 was attributable to a decrease in rental and other income. Rental income decreased due to a decrease in occupancy at Lake Forest Apartments offset by an increase in average rental rates. The decrease in other income was due to a decrease in interest income due to lower average cash balances in interest bearing accounts. Included in general and administrative expenses are reimbursements for the costs of services provided by the Managing General Partner as allowed under the Partnership Agreement associated with its management of the Partnership. Also included are costs associated with the quarterly and annual communications with investors and regulatory agencies and the annual audit required by the Partnership Agreement. As part of the ongoing business plan of the Partnership, the Managing General Partner monitors the rental market environment of its investment property to assess the feasibility of increasing rents, maintaining or increasing occupancy levels and protecting the Partnership from increases in expenses. As part of this plan, the Managing General Partner attempts to protect the Partnership from the burden of inflation-related increases in expenses by increasing rents and maintaining a high overall occupancy level. However, due to changing market conditions, which can result in the use of rental concessions and rental reductions to offset softening market conditions, there is no guarantee that the Managing General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan. Liquidity and Capital Resources At September 30, 2001, the Registrant had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $235,000 compared to approximately $275,000 at September 30, 2000. Cash and cash equivalents increased approximately $29,000 since December 31, 2000 due to approximately $270,000 of cash provided by operating activities partially offset by approximately $46,000 and $195,000 of cash used in investing and financing activities, respectively. Cash used in investing activities consisted of property improvements and replacements. Cash used in financing activities consisted of distributions to the partners. The Registrant invests its working capital reserves in interest bearing accounts. The sufficiency of existing liquid assets to meet future liquidity and capital expenditure requirements is directly related to the level of capital expenditures required at the Partnership's property to adequately maintain the physical assets and other operating needs of the Registrant and to comply with Federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements. The Partnership budgeted approximately $86,000 for capital improvements at Lake Forest Apartments for the year 2001 consisting primarily of structural improvements, floor covering replacements, heating and air conditioning upgrades and appliances. During the nine months ended September 30, 2001, the property completed approximately $46,000 in capital expenditures, consisting primarily of floor coverings, heating and air conditioning upgrades, appliances, exterior painting and pool improvements. These improvements were funded from operating cash flow. Additional improvements may be considered and will depend on the physical condition of the property and anticipated cash flow generated by the property. Additional capital expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available from operations. To the extent that such budgeted capital improvements are completed, the Registrant's distributable cash flow, if any, may be adversely affected at least in the short term. The Registrant's current assets are thought to be sufficient for any near-term needs (exclusive of capital improvements) of the Registrant. The Partnership declared and paid cash distributions from operations of approximately $195,000 (approximately $193,000 to the limited partners or $2.23 per limited partnership unit) during the nine months ended September 30, 2001. During the nine months ended September 30, 2000, the Partnership paid a cash distribution from the net sale proceeds of Poplar Square Shopping Center, which sold in December 1999, of approximately $1,205,000 (approximately $1,193,000 to the limited partners or $13.76 per limited partnership unit) and from operations of approximately $1,000,000 (approximately $990,000 to the limited partners or $11.41 per limited partnership unit). The Partnership's distribution policy is reviewed on a monthly basis. Future cash distributions will depend on the levels of net cash generated from operations, mortgage financing, and/or the sale of the property. There can be no assurance that the Partnership will generate sufficient funds from operations, after required capital expenditures, to permit additional distributions to its partners during the remainder of 2001 or subsequent periods. In addition to its indirect ownership of the general partner interests in the Partnership, AIMCO and its affiliates owned 40,934 limited partnership units (the "Units") in the Partnership representing 47.19% of the outstanding Units at September 30, 2001. A number of these Units were acquired pursuant to tender offers made by AIMCO or its affiliates. It is possible that AIMCO or its affiliates will make one or more additional offers to acquire additional limited partnership interests in the Partnership for cash or in exchange for units in the operating partnership of AIMCO. Under the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the Units are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters which would include voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the Managing General Partner. As a result of its ownership of 47.19% of the outstanding Units, AIMCO is in a position to influence all voting decisions with respect to the Registrant. When voting on matters, AIMCO would in all likelihood vote the Units it acquired in a manner favorable to the interest of the Managing General Partner because of its affiliation with the Managing General Partner. PART II - OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS In March 1998, several putative unitholders of limited partnership units of the Partnership commenced an action entitled Rosalie Nuanes, et al. v. Insignia Financial Group, Inc., et al. (the "Nuanes action") in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo. The plaintiffs named as defendants, among others, the Partnership, its Managing General Partner and several of their affiliated partnerships and corporate entities. The action purports to assert claims on behalf of a class of limited partners and derivatively on behalf of a number of limited partnerships (including the Partnership) which are named as nominal defendants, challenging, among other things, the acquisition of interests in certain general partner entities by Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ("Insignia") and entities which were, at one time, affiliates of Insignia; past tender offers by the Insignia affiliates to acquire limited partnership units; management of the partnerships by the Insignia affiliates; and the series of transactions which closed on October 1, 1998 and February 26, 1999 whereby Insignia and Insignia Properties Trust, respectively, were merged into AIMCO. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages and equitable relief, including judicial dissolution of the Partnership. On June 25, 1998, the Managing General Partner filed a motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The Managing General Partner filed demurrers to the amended complaint which were heard February 1999. Pending the ruling on such demurrers, settlement negotiations commenced. On November 2, 1999, the parties executed and filed a Stipulation of Settlement, settling claims, subject to court approval, on behalf of the Partnership and all limited partners who owned units as of November 3, 1999. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on November 3, 1999 from the Court, at which time the Court set a final approval hearing for December 10, 1999. Prior to the December 10, 1999 hearing, the Court received various objections to the settlement, including a challenge to the Court's preliminary approval based upon the alleged lack of authority of prior lead counsel to enter the settlement. On December 14, 1999, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates terminated the proposed settlement. In February 2000, counsel for some of the named plaintiffs filed a motion to disqualify plaintiff's lead and liaison counsel who negotiated the settlement. On June 27, 2000, the Court entered an order disqualifying them from the case and an appeal was taken from the order on October 5, 2000. On December 4, 2000, the Court appointed the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP as new lead counsel for plaintiffs and the putative class. Plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint on January 19, 2001. On March 2, 2001, the Managing General Partner and its affiliates filed a demurrer to the third amended complaint. On May 14, 2001, the Court heard the demurrer to the third amended complaint. On July 10, 2001, the Court issued an order sustaining defendants' demurrer on certain grounds. On July 20, 2001, plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer. On September 7, 2001, plaintiffs filed a fourth amended class and derivative action complaint. On September 12, 2001, the Court denied plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended complaint, which, together with a demurrer filed by other defendants, is currently scheduled to be heard on November 15, 2001. The Court has set the matter for trial in January 2003. During the third quarter of 2001, a complaint (the "Heller action") was filed against the same defendants that are named in the Nuanes action, captioned Heller v. Insignia Financial Group. On or about August 6, 2001, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint. The first amended complaint in the Heller action is brought as a purported derivative action, and asserts claims for among other things breach of fiduciary duty; unfair competition; conversion, unjust enrichment; and judicial dissolution. Plaintiffs in the Nuanes action filed a motion to consolidate the Heller action with the Nuanes action and stated that the Heller action was filed in order to preserve the derivative claims that were dismissed without leave to amend in the Nuanes action by the Court order dated July 10, 2001. On October 5, 2001, the Managing General Partner and affiliated defendants moved to strike the first amended complaint in its entirety for violating the Court's July 10, 2001 order granting in part and denying in part defendants' demurrer in the Nuanes action, or alternatively, to strike certain portions of the complaint based on the statute of limitations. Other defendants in the action demurred to the fourth amended complaint, and, alternatively, moved to strike the complaint. The matters are currently scheduled to be heard on November 15, 2001. The Managing General Partner does not anticipate that any costs, whether legal or settlement costs, associated with these cases will be material to the Partnership's overall operations. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: None. b) Reports on Form 8-K: None filed during the quarter ended September 30, 2001. SIGNATURES In accordance with the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized. ANGELES INCOME PROPERTIES, LTD. III By: Angeles Realty Corporation II Managing General Partner By: /s/Patrick J. Foye Patrick J. Foye Executive Vice President By: /s/Martha L. Long Martha L. Long Senior Vice President and Controller Date: November 13, 2001 -----END PRIVACY-ENHANCED MESSAGE-----