10-Q 1 a72424e10-q.txt FORM 10-Q PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 1 FORM 10-Q SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549 QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For Quarter Ended March 31, 2001 --------------------------------------------------------- Commission file number 0-16027 ---------------------------------------------------- REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ------------------------------------------------------ (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 13-3341425 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 27611 La Paz Road, P.O. Box 30009, Laguna Niguel, California 92607-0009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) (949) 643-7700 -------------------------------------------------- (Registrant's telephone number, including area code) N/A -------------------------------------------------- (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report.) Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 12(g), 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve 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 [ ] 2 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2001 INDEX

2 3 PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STATEMENTS OF NET ASSETS IN LIQUIDATION

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 3 4 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STATEMENTS OF CHANGES OF NET ASSETS IN LIQUIDATION (UNAUDITED)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 4 5 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - UNAUDITED (1) Accounting Policies The financial statements of Real Estate Income Partners III, Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") included herein have been prepared by the General Partner, without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. These financial statements include all adjustments which are of a normal recurring nature and, in the opinion of the General Partner, are necessary for a fair presentation. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes thereto included in the Partnership's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000. The Partnership uses the liquidation basis of accounting. Sale of the Properties During the year ended December 31, 1999, the Partnership sold its three remaining properties (including its 42% interest in Cooper Village Shopping Center) in three separate transactions. (2) Transactions with Affiliates The Partnership has no employees and, accordingly, the General Partner and its affiliates perform services on behalf of the Partnership in connection with administering the affairs of the Partnership. The General Partner and affiliates are reimbursed for their general and administrative costs actually incurred and associated with services performed on behalf of the Partnership. For the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, the Partnership incurred approximately $4,000 and $4,000, respectively, of such expenses. The amended Partnership Agreement provides for payment to the General Partner of a leasing fee for services rendered in connection with leasing space in a Partnership property after the expiration or termination of leases. Fees for leasing services for the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, amounted to $0 and $1,000, respectively. Due to the sale of all of the Partnership's properties, it no longer pays leasing fees. (3) Commitments and Contingencies Litigation So far as is known to the General Partner, the Partnership is not subject to any material pending legal proceedings, except for the following: 5 6 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - UNAUDITED (Cont'd.) (3) Commitments and Contingencies (Cont'd.) Litigation (Cont'd.) Bigelow Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 litigation On March 25, 1997, a limited partner named Bigelow-Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Investments, L.F. Special Fund II, L.P., L.F. Special Fund I, L.P., Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract and seeking to enjoin the Consent Solicitation dated February 18, 1997. On April 18, 1997, the court denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. On June 10, 1997, the court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. On June 13, 1997, the Partnership and its affiliated partnership Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, and their general partner, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, filed a complaint for declaratory relief in the Court of Chancery in Delaware against Bigelow-Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 L.P. The complaint seeks a declaration that the vote that the limited partners of the Partnership and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II took pursuant to the respective consent solicitations dated February 18, 1997 was effective to dissolve the respective partnerships and complied with applicable law and that the actions of the General Partner in utilizing the consent solicitations to solicit the vote of the limited partners did not breach any fiduciary or contractual duty to such limited partners, and also seeks an award of costs and fees to the plaintiffs. The defendant has answered the complaint. The parties have initiated discovery. No motions are pending at this time. In September 1998, Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnership 1990 informed the Partnership that it was filing suit in the Delaware Chancery Court against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Investments, BREICORP, LF Special Fund I, LP, LF Special Fund II. LP, Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson alleging a purported class action on behalf of the limited partners of the Partnership, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II alleging breach of fiduciary duty and incorporating the allegations set forth in the previously dismissed March 25, 1997 complaint filed in the Court of Chancery of Philadelphia County. In March 2000, defendants informed the Court and plaintiff that they would bring a Motion for Summary Judgment against the named plaintiff based upon the allegations set forth in plaintiff's complaint. On April 4, 2000, Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 filed a First Amended Class Action and Derivative Complaint against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Properties, Birtcher Ltd., Birtcher Investments, BREICORP, L.F. Special Fund II, L.P., 6 7 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - UNAUDITED (Cont'd.) (3) Commitments and Contingencies (Cont'd.) Litigation (Cont'd.) Bigelow Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 litigation (Cont'd.) L.F. Special Fund I, L.P., Liquidity Fund Asset Management, Inc., Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson, the Partnership, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty. Defendants have answered the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff has engaged in preliminary discovery. On October 27, 2000, defendants sought permission of the court to communicate an offer to settle to individual limited partners of the Partnership. Plaintiff's counsel opposed that motion. On December 4, 2000, the court ruled that defendants could communicate an offer to settle to individual limited partners. Thereafter, on December 12, 2000, the Partnership and the General Partner mailed to the limited partners an offer to settle this lawsuit and all other claims (including the Madison Partnership Liquidity Investors Litigation referenced below) for payment of each settling limited partner's pro rata share of the proceeds available for distribution from liquidation of the Partnership's properties (approximately $85 per $1,000 of original investment interest) plus a nominal payment of $1.00 from the General Partners for an assignment of all of a settling limited partner's interest in the Partnership to the General Partner. Limited partners holding 44% of the interests (including the Grape Settlement) in the Partnership settled on these terms. The aggregate distribution in connection with the December 12, 2000 offer, which was reflected as an accrual at December 31, 2000, was approximately $2,107,000. It has been paid in full as of March 31, 2001. On March 6, 2001, all of the defendants other than the Partnership and the general partners filed a motion to be dismissed from the case. Plaintiff has filed responsive papers. The court has not yet set a hearing date for this motion. Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation On April 2, 1999, Madison Partnership Liquidity Investors XVI, LLC and ISA Partnership Liquidity Investors filed a purported class and derivative action in the California Superior Court in Orange County, California (Case No. 807644) against Damson Birtcher Partners, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher Investments, Birtcher Limited, Breicorp LP Special Fund II, L. P., Liquidity Fund Asset Management, Inc., Robert M. Anderson, Brent R. Donaldson, Arthur B. Birtcher, Ronald E. Birtcher, and Richard G. Wollack, Defendants, and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, and Real Estate Income Partners III, Nominal Defendants. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract. The gravamen of the complaint is that the General Partners of these limited partnerships have not undertaken all reasonable efforts to expedite liquidation of the properties and to maximize the returns to 7 8 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - UNAUDITED (Cont'd.) (3) Commitments and Contingencies (Cont'd.) Litigation (Cont'd.) Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation (Cont'd.) the partnerships' limited partners. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, attorneys' fees and litigation expenses, and an order for dissolution of the partnerships and appointment of an independent liquidating trustee. On August 14, 2000, plaintiffs petitioned the court for an order certifying the action as a class action. Plaintiffs also asked the court to issue a writ mandating that the Partnership immediately distribute all liquidation proceeds to the limited partners. On December 19, 2000, the court denied both motions. The case is currently proceeding only as a derivative action. The court has set a status conference for May 25, 2001. As noted above, limited partners holding 44% of the interests in the Partnership have settled this (and all other) cases against the Partnership and the General Partner. (4) Accrued Expenses for Liquidation Accrued expenses for liquidation as of March 31, 2001, include estimates of costs to be incurred in carrying out the dissolution and liquidation of the Partnership through December 31, 2001. These costs include estimates of legal fees, accounting fees, tax preparation and filing fees, other professional services and the General Partner's liability insurance. During the three months ended March 31, 2001, the Partnership incurred $83,000 of such expenses. The actual costs could vary significantly from the related provisions due to the uncertainty related to the ongoing litigation discussed in note 3. The accrued expenses for liquidation do not take into consideration the possible outcome of the ongoing litigation (aside from estimated attorney fees through December 31, 2001). Such costs are unknown and are not estimable at this time. The Partnership is seeking reimbursement of certain litigation expenses and indemnity for any potential liability from its insurers. To date, the insurers have refused to reimburse any expenses and have denied coverage for potential liability, subject to a reservation of rights to reconsider their decision. 8 9 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Liquidity and Capital Resources Sale of the Properties During the last half of 1999, the Partnership sold its three remaining properties (including its 42% interest in Cooper Village Shopping Center) in three separate transactions. Other Matters The Partnership made no regular distributions during the year ended December 31, 2000 or during the three months ended March 31, 2001. Regular distributions for the year ended December 31, 1999, represented net cash flow from operations of the Partnership's properties and interest earned on the temporary investment of working capital, net of capital reserve requirements. In December 1999, the Partnership made two special distributions of $1,102,000 on December 8th and $5,096,000 on December 31st representing a portion of the sales proceeds from the sales of The Forum Office Park, Creek Edge Business Park and the Partnership's 42% interest in Cooper Village. In March 2000, the Partnership made another special distribution of $1,752,000 from a portion of the remaining sales proceeds it had been holding in reserve. On October 19, 2000, Grape Investors, LLC ("Grape"), the holder of 4.533% of the limited partnership interests of the Partnership, settled its portion of the purported class action lawsuits entitled "Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnerships Fund 1990 Litigation" and "Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation" (the "Grape Settlement"). In exchange for a complete settlement and release from Grape, the Partnership paid Grape its pro rata share of the proceeds available for distribution from the liquidation of the Partnership's properties. Grape's final distribution was $243,000, or approximately $85 per $1,000 of original investment. The General Partner also paid $1.00 for all of Grape's interest in the Partnership. On December 12, 2000, the Partnership and the General Partner mailed to the limited partners an offer to settle the "Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnerships Fund 1990 Litigation" and the "Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation" and all other claims (including the Madison Partnership Liquidity Investors Litigation referenced below) for payment of each settling limited partner's pro rata share of the proceeds available for distribution from liquidation of the Partnership's properties (approximately $85 per $1,000 of original investment interest) plus a nominal payment of $1.00 from the General Partners for an assignment of all of a settling limited partner's interest in the Partnership to the General Partner. Limited partners holding 44% (including the Grape Settlement) of the interests in the Partnership settled on these terms. The aggregate distribution in connection with the December 12, 2000 offer, which was reflected as an accrual at December 31, 2000, was approximately $2,107,000. It has been paid in full as of March 31, 2001. 9 10 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Cont'd.) Liquidity and Capital Resources (Cont'd.) Other Matters (Cont'd.) As of December 31, 1999, the Partnership had sold all of its operating properties. Two lawsuits remain pending against the Partnership and its General Partner and certain of its affiliates that seek, among other things, unspecified monetary damages. Since these cases are in the preliminary discovery phase, there is unavoidable uncertainty regarding their ultimate resolution. The Partnership Agreement mandates that the General Partner provide for all of the Partnership's liabilities and obligations, including contingent liabilities, before distributing liquidation proceeds to its partners. Therefore, the amount and timing of any distribution of liquidation proceeds will be determined by the General Partner in light of these and other relevant considerations. Due to these uncertainties, it is probable that future distributions will be limited to a liquidating distribution upon Partnership wind down should funds be available at that time. Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2001 During the last half of 1999, the Partnership sold its three remaining properties (including its 42% interest in Cooper Village Shopping Center) in three separate transactions. The Partnership's operating results have been reflected on the Statements of Changes of Net Assets in Liquidation. For the three months ended March 31, 2001, interest income was approximately $44,000 as compared to $96,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2000. The decrease in interest income was reflective of the decrease in cash and cash equivalent balances that resulted from the cash distributed to the limited partners in conjunction with the offer to settle. Accrued expenses for liquidation as of March 31, 2001, includes estimates of costs to be incurred in carrying out the dissolution and liquidation of the Partnership through December 31, 2001. These costs include estimates of legal fees, accounting fees, tax preparation and filing fees, other professional services and the general partner's liability insurance. During the year ended December 31, 2000, the General Partner continuously re-evaluated the estimated costs to wind up and dissolve the Partnership given the uncertainty involved with the ongoing litigation and the provision for liquidation expenses was accordingly adjusted to reflect the revised estimates. 10 11 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Cont'd.) Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2001 (Cont'd.) The actual costs could vary significantly from the related provisions due to the uncertainty related to the length of time required to complete the liquidation and dissolution and the complexities which may arise. The accrued expenses for liquidation do not take into consideration the possible outcome of the ongoing litigation (aside from estimated attorney fees through December 31, 2001). Such costs are unknown and are not estimable at this time. Liquidation expenses incurred for the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, included charges of $4,000 and $6,000, respectively, from the General Partner and its affiliates for services rendered in connection with administering the affairs of the Partnership. Also included in liquidation expenses incurred for the three months ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, are direct charges of $79,000 and $70,000, respectively, relating to audit fees, tax preparation fees, legal and professional fees, costs incurred in providing information to the Limited Partners and other miscellaneous costs. ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE MARKET RISK DISCLOSURES As of March 31, 2001, the Partnership had cash equivalents of $2,852,000 invested in interest-bearing certificates of deposit. These investments are subject to interest rate risk due to changes in interest rates upon maturity. Declines in interest rates over time would reduce Partnership interest income. 11 12 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PART II. OTHER INFORMATION ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS So far as is known to the General Partner, the Partnership is not subject to any material pending legal proceedings, except for the following: Bigelow Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 Litigation On March 25, 1997, a limited partner named Bigelow-Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Investments, L.F. Special Fund II, L.P., L.F. Special Fund I, L.P., Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract and seeking to enjoin the Consent Solicitation dated February 18, 1997. On April 18, 1997, the court denied the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. On June 10, 1997, the court dismissed the plaintiff's complaint on the basis of lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. On June 13, 1997, the Partnership and its affiliated partnership Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, and their general partner, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, filed a complaint for declaratory relief in the Court of Chancery in Delaware against Bigelow-Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 L.P. The complaint seeks a declaration that the vote that the limited partners of the Partnership and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II took pursuant to the respective consent solicitations dated February 18, 1997 was effective to dissolve the respective partnerships and complied with applicable law and that the actions of the General Partner in utilizing the consent solicitations to solicit the vote of the limited partners did not breach any fiduciary or contractual duty to such limited partners, and also seeks an award of costs and fees to the plaintiffs. The defendant has answered the complaint. The parties have initiated discovery. No motions are pending at this time. In September 1998, Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnership 1990 informed the Partnership that it was filing suit in the Delaware Chancery Court against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Investments, BREICORP, LF Special Fund I, LP, LF Special Fund II. LP, Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson alleging a purported class action on behalf of the limited partners of the Partnership, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II alleging breach of fiduciary duty and incorporating the allegations set forth in the previously dismissed March 25, 1997 complaint filed in the Court of Chancery of Philadelphia County. 12 13 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (Cont'd.) Bigelow Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 Litigation (Cont'd.) In March 2000, defendants informed the Court and plaintiff that they would bring a Motion for Summary Judgment against the named plaintiff based upon the allegations set forth in plaintiff's complaint. On April 4, 2000, Bigelow/Diversified Secondary Partnership Fund 1990 filed a First Amended Class Action and Derivative Complaint against Damson/Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Properties, Birtcher Ltd., Birtcher Investments, BREICORP, L.F. Special Fund II, L.P., L.F. Special Fund I, L.P., Liquidity Fund Asset Management, Inc., Arthur Birtcher, Ronald Birtcher, Robert Anderson, Richard G. Wollack and Brent R. Donaldson, the Partnership, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty. Defendants have answered the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff has engaged in preliminary discovery. On October 27, 2000, defendants sought permission of the court to communicate an offer to settle to individual limited partners of the Partnership. Plaintiff's counsel opposed that motion. On December 4, 2000, the court ruled that defendants could communicate an offer to settle to individual limited partners. Thereafter, on December 12, 2000, the Partnership and the General Partner mailed to the limited partners an offer to settle this lawsuit and all other claims (including the Madison Partnership Liquidity Investors Litigation referenced below) for payment of each settling limited partner's pro rata share of the proceeds available for distribution from liquidation of the Partnership's properties (approximately $85 per $1,000 of original investment interest) plus a nominal payment of $1.00 from the General Partners for an assignment of all of a settling limited partner's interest in the Partnership to the General Partner. Limited partners holding 44% of the interests (including the Grape Settlement) in the Partnership settled on these terms. The aggregate distribution in connection with the December 12, 2000 offer, which was reflected as an accrual at December 31, 2000, was approximately $2,107,000. It has been paid in full as of March 31, 2001. On March 6, 2001, all of the defendants other than the Partnership and the general partners filed a motion to be dismissed from the case. Plaintiff has filed responsive papers. The court has not yet set a hearing date for this motion. Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation On April 2, 1999, Madison Partnership Liquidity Investors XVI, LLC and ISA Partnership Liquidity Investors filed a purported class and derivative action in the California Superior Court in Orange County, California (Case No. 807644) against Damson Birtcher Partners, Birtcher/Liquidity Properties, Birtcher Partners, Birtcher Investors, Birtcher Investments, Birtcher Limited, Breicorp LP Special Fund II, 13 14 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (Cont'd.) Madison Partnership and ISA Partnership Litigation (Cont'd.) L.P., Liquidity Fund Asset Management, Inc., Robert M. Anderson, Brent R. Donaldson, Arthur B. Birtcher, Ronald E. Birtcher, and Richard G. Wollack, Defendants, and Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-I, Damson/Birtcher Realty Income Fund-II, and Real Estate Income Partners III, Nominal Defendants. The complaint asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract. The gravamen of the complaint is that the General Partners of these limited partnerships have not undertaken all reasonable efforts to expedite liquidation of the properties and to maximize the returns to the partnerships' limited partners. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, attorneys' fees and litigation expenses, and an order for dissolution of the partnerships and appointment of an independent liquidating trustee. On August 14, 2000, plaintiffs petitioned the court for an order certifying the action as a class action. Plaintiffs also asked the court to issue a writ mandating that the Partnership immediately distribute all liquidation proceeds to the limited partners. On December 19, 2000, the court denied both motions. The case is currently proceeding only as a derivative action. The court has set a status conference for May 25, 2001. As noted above, limited partners holding 44% of the interests in the Partnership have settled this (and all other) cases against the Partnership and the General Partner. ITEM 6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K a) Exhibits: None. b) Reports on Form 8-K: None filed in the quarter ended March 31, 2001. 14 15 REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP SIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

REAL ESTATE INCOME PARTNERS III LTD PARTNERSHIP 10-Q