UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                   Form 10-QSB

(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
    1934

                    For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002


[ ]TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
   1934


                For the transition period from _________to _________

                         Commission file number 0-10304


                               ANGELES PARTNERS X
         (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)



         California                                             95-3557899
(State or other jurisdiction of                              (I.R.S. Employer
 incorporation or organization)                             Identification No.)

                          55 Beattie Place, PO Box 1089
                        Greenville, South Carolina 29602
                      (Address of principal executive offices)

                                 (864) 239-1000
                           (Issuer's telephone number)


                         PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION



ITEM 1.     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS




                               ANGELES PARTNERS X
                           CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
                                   (Unaudited)
                          (in thousands, except unit data)

                                  June 30, 2002

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


Assets
<S>                                                                        <C>
   Cash and cash equivalents                                               $   140
   Receivables and deposits                                                     36
   Restricted escrows                                                           89
   Other assets                                                                155
   Investment properties:
      Land                                                 $    312
      Buildings and related personal property                10,348
                                                             10,660
      Less accumulated depreciation                          (7,846)         2,814
                                                                           $ 3,234

Liabilities and Partners' Deficit
Liabilities
   Accounts payable                                                         $   10
   Tenant security deposit liabilities                                          31
   Accrued property taxes                                                       25
   Other liabilities                                                           160
   Mortgage notes payable                                                    8,462

Partners' Deficit
   General partners                                        $   (247)
   Limited partners (18,625 units issued and
      outstanding)                                           (5,207)        (5,454)
                                                                           $ 3,234
            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>






                               ANGELES PARTNERS X
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                                   (Unaudited)
                          (in thousands, except unit data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                           Three Months Ended       Six Months Ended
                                                June 30,                June 30,
                                            2002        2001        2002        2001
Revenues:
<S>                                        <C>         <C>        <C>         <C>
  Rental income                            $ 567       $ 585      $ 1,156     $ 1,175
  Other income                                 48          45         103          83
        Total revenues                        615         630       1,259       1,258

Expenses:
  Operating                                   218         235         453         446
  General and administrative                   61          65         110         112
  Depreciation                                132         126         262         248
  Interest                                    174         174         346         348
  Property taxes                               51          43         104          87
        Total expenses                        636         643       1,275       1,241

Net (loss) income                          $ (21)      $ (13)      $ (16)       $ 17

Net income allocated to general
  partners (1%)                             $ --        $ --        $ --        $ --
Net (loss) income allocated to
  limited partners (99%)                      (21)        (13)        (16)         17
                                           $ (21)      $ (13)      $ (16)       $ 17
 Net (loss) income per limited
   partnership unit                       $ (1.13)     $ (.70)     $ (.86)     $ .91

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>


<PAGE>




                                 ANGELES PARTNERS X
               CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT
                                   (Unaudited)
                          (in thousands, except unit data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                     Limited
                                     Partnership     General      Limited
                                        Units        Partners    Partners     Total

<S>                                    <C>             <C>        <C>        <C>
Original capital contributions         18,714          $ 1        $18,714    $18,715

Partners' deficit at
   December 31, 2001                   18,625         $ (247)     $(5,191)   $(5,438)

Net loss for the six months
   ended June 30, 2002                     --             --          (16)       (16)

Partners' deficit
   at June 30, 2002                    18,625         $ (247)     $(5,207)   $(5,454)

            See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>




                               ANGELES PARTNERS X
                      CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                                   (Unaudited)
                                   (in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                  Six Months Ended
                                                                        June 30,
                                                                  2002         2001
Cash flows from operating activities:
<S>                                                              <C>          <C>
  Net (loss) income                                              $ (16)       $ 17
  Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash
   provided by operating activities:
   Depreciation                                                     262          248
   Amortization of discounts and loan costs                          20           21
   Change in accounts:
      Receivables and deposits                                        3           19
      Other assets                                                  (14)          (7)
      Accounts payable                                              (73)         (37)
      Tenant security deposit liabilities                            10            1
      Accrued property taxes                                         25           20
      Due to General Partner                                         (2)          --
      Other liabilities                                              73           25
       Net cash provided by operating activities                    288          307

Cash flows from investing activities:
  Property improvements and replacements                            (44)        (184)
  Net withdrawals from restricted escrows                            15            8
       Net cash used in investing activities                        (29)        (176)

Cash flows from financing activities:
  Payments on mortgage notes payable                                (66)         (61)
  Payments on advances from General Partner                        (137)          --
       Net cash used in financing activities                       (203)         (61)

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents                            56           70

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period                     84          158

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period                       $ 140        $ 228

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest                                           $ 326        $ 327


At  December  31,  2000,  approximately  $83,000 of  property  improvements  and
replacements were included in accounts payable.

              See Accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
</TABLE>

<PAGE>





                               ANGELES PARTNERS X
                     NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
                                   (Unaudited)


Note A - Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of Angeles Partners
X (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.
The general partner responsible for management of the Partnership's  business is
Angeles Realty  Corporation (the "General  Partner" or "ARC"). In the opinion of
the General Partner,  all adjustments  (consisting of normal recurring accruals)
considered  necessary  for a fair  presentation  have been  included.  Operating
results  for the  three  and six  month  periods  ended  June  30,  2002 are not
necessarily  indicative  of the results that may be expected for the year ending
December 31, 2002. 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,  2001.  The  General  Partner is a
wholly  owned  subsidiary  of  Apartment   Investment  and  Management   Company
("AIMCO"), a publicly traded real estate investment trust.

Note B - Transactions with Affiliated Parties

The Partnership has no employees and is dependent on the General Partner and its
affiliates for the management and administration of all Partnership  activities.
The Partnership  Agreement  provides for (i) certain  payments to affiliates for
services and (ii)  reimbursement of certain  expenses  incurred by affiliates on
behalf of the Partnership.

During the six months  ended June 30, 2002 and 2001,  affiliates  of the General
Partner  were  entitled to receive 5% of gross  receipts  from the  Registrant's
properties for providing property  management  services.  The Registrant paid to
such affiliates  approximately $62,000 and $65,000 for the six months ended June
30,  2002 and 2001,  respectively.  These  amounts  are  included  in  operating
expenses.

An  affiliate  of the General  Partner  received  reimbursement  of  accountable
administrative  expenses amounting to approximately  $67,000 and $65,000 for the
six  months  ended  June 30,  2002 and 2001,  respectively.  These  amounts  are
included in general and administrative expenses and investment properties.

In accordance  with the  Partnership  Agreement,  the General Partner loaned the
Partnership funds during the third and fourth quarters of 2001, to cover capital
improvements at Greentree Apartments. Interest is charged at the prime rate plus
2%. Interest expense was approximately  $2,000 for the six months ended June 30,
2002.  During the six months ended June 30, 2002,  the  Partnership  repaid this
loan. The  Partnership  made principal  payments of  approximately  $137,000 and
interest payments of approximately  $4,000 to the General Partner during the six
months  ended June 30,  2002.  There were no loans from the  General  Partner or
associated interest expense during the six months ended June 30, 2001.

The Partnership  Agreement provides for a fee equal to 5% of "net cash flow from
operations",  as defined in the Partnership Agreement, to be paid to the General
Partner for executive and administrative services. The Partnership accrued a fee
of approximately $7,000 to the General Partner for the six months ended June 30,
2002,  which is included  in other  liabilities  and general and  administrative
expense.  No such  management fee was accrued or earned for the six months ended
June 30, 2001.

Pursuant  to the  Partnership  Agreement,  the  General  Partner is  entitled to
receive a distribution  equal to 4% of the aggregate  disposition  price of sold
properties.  The  Partnership  paid a distribution  of $154,000,  to the General
Partner related to the sale of Vista Hills Apartments in 1999. This distribution
is  subordinate  to  the  limited  partners  receiving  their  original  capital
contributions  plus a  cumulative  preferred  return  of 6% per  annum  of their
adjusted capital  investment,  as defined in the Partnership  Agreement.  If the
limited   partners  have  not  received  these  returns  when  the   Partnership
terminates, the General Partner will return this amount to the Partnership.

Beginning in 2001, the  Partnership  began insuring its properties up to certain
limits through coverage provided by AIMCO which is generally  self-insured for a
portion of losses and  liabilities  related  to workers  compensation,  property
casualty and vehicle liability. The Partnership insures its properties above the
AIMCO  limits  through  insurance  policies  obtained  by  AIMCO  from  insurers
unaffiliated with the General Partner. During the six months ended June 30, 2002
and 2001, the Partnership was charged by AIMCO and its affiliates  approximately
$30,000 and $33,000,  respectively,  for insurance  coverage and fees associated
with policy claims administration.

Note C - Legal Proceedings

In March 1998, several putative unit holders 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 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 General  Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs  filed an amended  complaint.  The 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 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  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
General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended
complaint,  which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court
served its order granting in part the demurrer.  The Court has dismissed without
leave  to amend  certain  of the  plaintiffs'  claims.  On  February  11,  2002,
plaintiffs  filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class  comprised of all
non-affiliated  persons  who own or have owned  units in the  partnerships.  The
General Partner and affiliated  defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002,
the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class  certification and took
the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was
submitted by the parties.  On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating
the  current  trial  date of  January  13,  2003 (as well as the  pre-trial  and
discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7,
2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement.

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 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.  On December  11, 2001,  the court heard  argument on the
motions and took the matters under  submission.  On February 4, 2002,  the Court
served  notice of its order  granting  defendants'  motion to strike  the Heller
complaint  as a violation  of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes  action.  On
March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs  filed a notice  appealing the order striking the
complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.

The  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.


<PAGE>




ITEM 2.     MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OR PLAN OF OPERATION

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
discussions 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 properties consist of two apartment complexes. The
following table sets forth the average occupancy of the Partnership's properties
for the six months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001:

                                                   Average Occupancy
      Property                                      2002       2001

      Greentree Apartments                          96%        96%
        Mobile, Alabama
      Carriage Hills Apartments                     94%        95%
        East Lansing, Michigan

Results of Operations

The  Registrant's  net loss for the three and six months ended June 30, 2002 was
approximately  $21,000 and $16,000,  respectively,  as compared to a net loss of
approximately  $13,000 and net income of approximately $17,000 for the three and
six months ended June 30, 2001,  respectively.  The increase in net loss for the
three  months  ended  June 30,  2002 is due to a  decrease  in  total  revenues,
partially offset by a decrease in total expenses. The decrease in net income for
the six months  ended June 30,  2002 is due to an  increase  in total  expenses,
while total revenues remained relatively constant for the comparable periods.

Total  revenues  decreased  for the three  months  ended June 30,  2002 due to a
decrease in rental  income,  partially  offset by an  increase in other  income.
Total revenues  remained  relatively  constant for the six months ended June 30,
2002,  as a decrease in rental income was offset by an increase in other income.
Other income increased primarily due to increases in laundry income at Greentree
Apartments  and utility  reimbursements  at Carriage  Hills  Apartments.  Rental
income  decreased  for  the  comparable  periods,  primarily  due to the  slight
decrease in occupancy at Carriage  Hills  Apartments and an increase in bad debt
expense,  partially  offset by an increase in the average rental rate at both of
the Partnership's investment properties.

The  decrease in total  expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2002 is due
to  a  decrease  in  operating  expenses,   partially  offset  by  increases  in
depreciation  and property tax expenses.  The decrease in operating  expenses is
primarily  due  to  decreases  in  utility  and  maintenance  expenses  at  both
properties.  The  increase in total  expenses  for the six months ended June 30,
2002 is due to increases in operating,  depreciation, and property tax expenses.
Operating  expenses  increased for the six months ended June 30, 2002  primarily
due  to an  increase  in  maintenance  expense  at  both  of  the  Partnership's
investment  properties  and  an  increase  in  insurance  expense  at  Greentree
Apartments.  Depreciation  expense  increased  for both the three and six months
ended June 30, 2002 due to an  increase in  depreciable  assets  resulting  from
property  improvements  and  replacements  placed into  service  during the past
twelve months.  Property tax expense increased for both the three and six months
ended June 30, 2002  primarily due to an increase in the tax rate at both of the
Partnership's  investment  properties  and an increase in the assessed  value at
Carriage  Hills  Apartments.  Interest and general and  administrative  expenses
remained relatively constant for the comparable periods. Included in general and
administrative   expenses  at  both  June  30,  2002  and  2001  are  management
reimbursements   to  the  General  Partner  as  allowed  under  the  Partnership
Agreement.  In  addition,   costs  associated  with  the  quarterly  and  annual
communications  with  investors  and  regulatory  agencies  and the annual audit
required by the Partnership Agreement are also included.

As part of the ongoing  business plan of the  Partnership,  the General  Partner
monitors the rental market  environment of each of its investment  properties 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 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
General Partner will be able to sustain such a plan.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

At June 30, 2002, the Partnership had cash and cash equivalents of approximately
$140,000,  compared to approximately  $228,000 at June 30, 2001. The increase in
cash and cash equivalents of approximately $56,000 for the six months ended June
30, 2002,  from the  Partnership's  calendar  year end, is due to  approximately
$288,000  of  cash  provided  by  operating  activities,   partially  offset  by
approximately  $203,000 of cash used in financing  activities and  approximately
$29,000 of cash used in investing activities.  Cash used in investing activities
consisted of property  improvements  and  replacements,  partially offset by net
withdrawals from escrow accounts maintained by the mortgage lender. Cash used in
financing  activities consisted of payments on advances from the General Partner
and payments of principal  made on the mortgages  encumbering  the  Registrant's
properties.  The Partnership  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 investment  properties 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. Capital improvements
planned for the Partnership's properties are detailed below.

Greentree  Apartments:  For  2002 the  Partnership  has  budgeted  approximately
$61,000 for capital improvements, consisting primarily of floor covering and air
conditioning unit replacements.  The Partnership completed approximately $18,000
in capital expenditures at Greentree Apartments as of June 30, 2002,  consisting
primarily  of  appliance  and floor  covering  replacements  and  furniture  and
fixtures.   These   improvements  were  funded  primarily  from  operations  and
replacement reserves.  Additional improvements may be considered and will depend
on the physical  condition of the property as well as the anticipated  cash flow
generated by the property and replacement reserves.

Carriage Hills Apartments:  For 2002 the Partnership has budgeted  approximately
$288,000 for capital  improvements,  consisting primarily of window replacement,
roofing  upgrades,  and floor covering  replacement.  The Partnership  completed
approximately $26,000 in capital expenditures at Carriage Hills Apartments as of
June 30,  2002,  consisting  primarily  of floor  covering  replacements.  These
improvements  were  funded  from  operations.  Additional  improvements  may  be
considered and will depend on the physical  condition of the property as well as
the anticipated cash flow generated by the property and replacement reserves.


<PAGE>



The additional  capital  expenditures will be incurred only if cash is available
from  operations  and  Partnership  reserves.  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  mortgage
indebtedness of approximately $8,462,000,  net of discount, matures October 2003
and December  2004 with balloon  payments due at maturity.  The General  Partner
will attempt to refinance such indebtedness  and/or sell the properties prior to
such  maturity  dates.  If the  properties  cannot be  refinanced  or sold for a
sufficient  amount,  the  Registrant  will risk losing such  properties  through
foreclosure.

There were no  distributions to the limited partners during the six months ended
June 30, 2002 and 2001. Future cash  distributions  will depend on the levels of
net cash generated from  operations,  the  availability of cash reserves and the
timing of debt maturities, refinancings, and/or property sales. The Registrant's
cash available for distribution is reviewed on a monthly basis.  There can be no
assurance,  however,  that the Partnership  will generate  sufficient funds from
operations, after required capital expenditures,  to permit any distributions to
its partners in 2002 or subsequent  periods.  Distributions may be restricted by
the  requirement  to deposit net  operating  income (as defined in the  mortgage
note) into the Reserve  Account until the Reserve Account is funded in an amount
equal to $200 to $400 per apartment unit for Greentree Apartments for a total of
$35,600 to  $71,200.  As of June 30,  2002,  the  Partnership  has  deposits  of
approximately $71,000 in the reserve account.

Other

In addition to its indirect  ownership of the general  partner  interests in the
Partnership,  AIMCO and its affiliates  owned 10,938 limited  partnership  units
(the "Units") in the Partnership representing 58.73% of the outstanding Units at
June 30, 2002. 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 acquire additional units of limited partnership interest in the Partnership
in  exchange  for  cash or a  combination  of cash and  units  in the  operating
partnership of AIMCO either through private  purchases or tender offers. In this
regard, on June 25, 2002, a tender offer by AIMCO  Properties,  L.P., to acquire
any and all of the units not owned by affiliates  of AIMCO for a purchase  price
of $111.00 per unit expired.  Pursuant to this offer, AIMCO acquired 1,012 units
during  the  quarter  ended  June 30,  2002.  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 General  Partner.  As a
result  of its  ownership  of  58.73% of the  outstanding  Units,  AIMCO is in a
position  to  control  all voting  decisions  with  respect  to the  Registrant.
Although the General  Partner owes fiduciary  duties to the limited  partners of
the Partnership,  the General Partner also owed fiduciary duties to AIMCO as its
sole  Stockholder.  As a result,  the duties of the General Partner,  as general
partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with
the duties of the General Partner to AIMCO, as its sole stockholder.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States which require the Partnership
to  make  estimates  and  assumptions.  The  Partnership  believes  that  of its
significant  accounting  policies,  the following may involve a higher degree of
judgment and complexity.



<PAGE>


Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Investment  properties  are  recorded at cost,  less  accumulated  depreciation,
unless  considered  impaired.  If  events  or  circumstances  indicate  that the
carrying  amount of a property may be  impaired,  the  Partnership  will make an
assessment of its  recoverability  by estimating  the  undiscounted  future cash
flows,  excluding  interest  charges,  of the property.  If the carrying  amount
exceeds the aggregate  future cash flows,  the  Partnership  would  recognize an
impairment  loss to the extent the carrying amount exceeds the fair value of the
property.

Real  property  investments  are  subject  to varying  degrees of risk.  Several
factors  may  adversely  affect  the  economic  performance  and  value  of  the
Partnership's  investment  properties.  These  factors  include  changes  in the
national,  regional and local economic  climate;  local  conditions,  such as an
oversupply  of  multifamily   properties;   competition   from  other  available
multifamily  property  owners and changes in market  rental  rates.  Any adverse
changes in these factors could cause an impairment in the Partnership's assets.

Revenue Recognition

The Partnership generally leases apartment units for twelve-month terms or less.
Rental income  attributable to leases is recognized monthly as it is earned. The
Partnership will offer rental concessions during  particularly slow months or in
response  to  heavy  competition  from  other  similar  complexes  in the  area.
Concessions are charged to income as incurred.


<PAGE>


                           PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1.     LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In March 1998, several putative unit holders 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 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 General  Partner filed a
motion seeking dismissal of the action. In lieu of responding to the motion, the
plaintiffs  filed an amended  complaint.  The 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 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  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
General Partner and affiliated defendants filed a demurrer to the fourth amended
complaint,  which was heard on December 11, 2001. On February 2, 2002, the Court
served its order granting in part the demurrer.  The Court has dismissed without
leave  to amend  certain  of the  plaintiffs'  claims.  On  February  11,  2002,
plaintiffs  filed a motion seeking to certify a putative class  comprised of all
non-affiliated  persons  who own or have owned  units in the  partnerships.  The
General Partner and affiliated  defendants oppose the motion. On April 29, 2002,
the Court held a hearing on plaintiffs' motion for class  certification and took
the matter under submission after further briefing, as ordered by the court, was
submitted by the parties.  On July 10, 2002, the Court entered an order vacating
the  current  trial  date of  January  13,  2003 (as well as the  pre-trial  and
discovery cut-off dates) and stayed the case in its entirety through November 7,
2002 so that the parties can have an opportunity to discuss settlement.

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 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.  On December  11, 2001,  the court heard  argument on the
motions and took the matters under  submission.  On February 4, 2002,  the Court
served  notice of its order  granting  defendants'  motion to strike  the Heller
complaint  as a violation  of its July 10, 2001 order in the Nuanes  action.  On
March 27, 2002, the plaintiffs  filed a notice  appealing the order striking the
complaint. The parties are currently in the midst of briefing that appeal.

The  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.


<PAGE>



ITEM 6.     EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

            a)    Exhibits:

               Exhibit  3.1,  Amended   Certificate  and  Agreement  of  Limited
                    Partnership  dated June 24,  1980,  filed in Form 10-K dated
                    October 31, 1982, and is incorporated herein by reference.

               Exhibit 99,  Certification  of Chief Executive  Officer and Chief
                    Financial Officer.

            b)    Reports on Form 8-K:

                  None filed during the quarter ended June 30, 2002.


<PAGE>



                                   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 PARTNERS X


                                    By:   Angeles Realty Corporation
                                          Its General Partner


                                    By:   /s/Patrick J. Foye
                                          Patrick J. Foye
                                          Executive Vice President


                                    By:   /s/Thomas C. Novosel
                                          Thomas C. Novosel
                                          Senior Vice President
                                          and Chief Accounting Officer


                                    Date: August 14, 2002


<PAGE>


Exhibit 99


                          Certification of CEO and CFO
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             As Adopted Pursuant to
                   Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In  connection  with the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of Angeles  Partners X
(the "Partnership"),  for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof  (the  "Report"),
Patrick  J.  Foye,  as the  equivalent  of the Chief  Executive  Officer  of the
Partnership,  and Paul J.  McAuliffe,  as the equivalent of the Chief  Financial
Officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that, to the best of his knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Partnership.


                                           /s/Patrick J. Foye
                                    Name:  Patrick J. Foye
                                    Date:  August 14, 2002


                                           /s/Paul J. McAuliffe
                                    Name:  Paul J. McAuliffe
                                    Date:  August 14, 2002

This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the  Partnership for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.