Notice for Pendency of Class Action on Behalf of name="AMRE">Amre Investors
NEW YORK, NY --May 14, 1997--Pursuant to Section 21D(a) (3)
(A) (i) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, notice is hereby
given that on May 12, 1997, a class action lawsuit was filed in
the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey,
on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the
common stock of Amre, Inc.
("Amre" or the "company") between Sept. 3,
1996 and Jan. 17, 1997, inclusive (the "Class Period").
The complaint charges HFS Inc. ("HFS") and certain
former officers and directors of the company during the relevant
time period with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, by, among other things,
misrepresenting and omitting material information concerning the
strength and nature of the company's relationship with HFS and
the financial condition of the company. The complaint alleges
that defendants knew or recklessly disregarded that the
relationship was significantly weaker than defendants publicly
represented. Ultimately, as a result of HFS's withdrawal of
financial and other support for Amre, Amre was forced into
bankruptcy. Because of the issuance of a series of false and
misleading statements concerning Amre's business and defendants'
concealment of matters regarding the deteriorating relationship
with HFS, the price of Amre common stock was artificially
inflated during the Class Period. While certain material
information was concealed from investors, Amre insiders unloaded
large blocks of Amre stock at artificially inflated prices,
reaping huge profits in excess of $2.5 million.
Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of class members
and are represented by the law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad
Hynes & Lerach LLP ("Milberg Weiss").
Milberg Weiss maintains offices in New York City, San Diego,
Los Angeles and San Francisco and is active in major litigations
pending in federal and state courts throughout the United States.
Milberg Weiss has taken a leading role in numerous important
actions on behalf of defrauded investors, and is responsible for
a number of outstanding recoveries which, in the aggregate, total
approximately $2 billion. For more information about Milberg
Weiss, please visit our website at www.milberg.com.
If you are a member of the class described above, you may, not
later than sixty days from today, move the Court to serve as lead
plaintiff of the class if you so choose. In order to serve as
lead plaintiff, however, you must meet certain legal
CONTACT: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP
Marvel bondholders win right to vote
majority stake in Marvel and to oust company's board
NEW YORK, NY --May 14, 1997--The Official Committee of
Bondholders of Marvel Holdings, Inc.,
Marvel (Parent) Holdings, Inc. and Marvel III Holdings, Inc.
("Bondholders' Committee") announced today that a
Federal Judge has granted their appeal, permitting them to vote
the majority of Marvel Entertainment Group, Inc. (NYSE: MRV)
Common Stock securing the bonds to change the Marvel Board of
Directors, effective May 23, 1997.
"This is a tremendous victory for the bondholders, the
public equity holders and all other parties interested in seeing
Marvel emerge from Chapter 11 and return to profitability,"
said David M. Friedman of Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman
LLP, attorneys for the Bondholders' Committee. "As soon as
the bondholders oust the lame-duck Marvel Board, former Marvel
executive Joseph Calamari will head-up a transition team
committed to turning Marvel's business around. We will now set
our sights on obtaining court approval of our disclosure
statement so we can distribute our plan to creditors and
stockholders and continue to move toward confirmation."
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Helen S. Balick has set a
disclosure statement hearing for June 16, 1997 to consider the
Joint Plan of reorganization for Marvel Entertainment proposed by
the Bondholders' Committee together with Marvel Holdings, Inc. on
April 29. Upon approval of the disclosure statement by the Court,
the Bondholders' Committee and Marvel Holdings intend to begin
mailing the Joint Plan to creditors immediately.
The order under appeal enjoining the Bondholders' Committee
and the indenture trustee from voting any of the pledged stock
had been granted by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court on March 24,
1997 on the basis that relief from the automatic stay in the
Marvel bankruptcy proceeding must precede any change of Marvel's
Board of Directors. In the same ruling, Judge Balick had also
ruled that members of the Bondholders' Committee and the
indenture trustee could vote the Common Stock of Marvel Parent to
change the Board of Directors of Marvel Holdings. The Bondholders
Committee has since installed a new Board at Marvel Holdings,
Inc., comprised of Mr. Carl C. Icahn, Mr. Robert Mitchel,
treasurer of ACF Industries, Inc., and Mr. Vincent J. Intrieri,
Portfolio Manager at Westgate International, L.P.
The Bondholders' Committee had notified Marvel Entertainment
of its intention to vote its majority stake to elect a new Board
of Marvel on March 21, 1997. The Bondholders' Committee proposed
a Board consisting of nine members, seven selected by the
Bondholders Committee and two to be selected by Marvel's
Committee of Equity Security Holders (the "Equity
Committee"). The members selected by the Bondholders
Committee are as follows: Mr. Harold First, a specialist in
entertainment accounting, Mr. Robert Mitchel, treasurer of ACF
Industries, Inc., Mr. Carl C. Icahn, Mr. Juoko T. Tamminen, Vice
President of Icahn Associates, Mr. J. Winston Fowlkes III,
co-founder Voyager Communications, a publisher of Action
Adventure Comics and a former Vice President of Time Warner
Communications, Mr. Vincent J. Intrieri, Portfolio Manager at
Westgate International, L.P., and Charles K. MacDonald, a private
investor who is a director of Biotechnology General Corp. and
LIVE Entertainment Inc., a movie production company.
The Bondholders' Committee, which represents the owners of
$894 million in bonds secured against approximately 80% of the
equity in Marvel Entertainment, had opposed the original
reorganization plan proposed by Marvel Entertainment, which
Marvel Entertainment has since withdrawn.
The Official Committee of Bondholders of Marvel Holdings,
Inc., Marvel (Parent) Holdings, Inc. and Marvel III Holdings,
Inc. was formed on January 9, 1997 in Wilmington, Delaware. The
members of the Bondholders' Committee include High River Limited
Partnership (Chairman), Westgate International, L.P.
(Vice-Chairman), United Equities Commodities Company, Jeff
Schultz Investments, Whereco, Inc. and M3, LLC. The Bondholders'
Committee has retained Jefferies & Co. Inc. as its financial
CONTACT: Sard Verbinnen & Co George Sard/Paul Caminiti
Florida Power & Light, Seeking to Abrogate
Contracts, Forces Okeelanta and Osceola Cogeneration Plants To
File for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla.--May 14, 1997-- Owners file petition to
protect assets, plant employees, bondholders and investors from
FPL's attempt to break power sales contracts
World's largest bagasse/biomass cogeneration plants are
producing clean, renewable electricity from South Florida
Asserting that Florida Power & Light Co. (FPL) has acted
to invalidate two contracts to purchase electricity, the
Okeelanta Power and Gator Generating
Company Limited Partnerships, owners of the Okeelanta and
Osceola Cogeneration Plants in western Palm Beach County, said
today that they have been forced to file for Chapter 11
According to the Partnerships, the petition, filed this
morning in the West Palm Beach Division of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the Southern District of Florida, will protect the
assets, plant employees, bondholders and investors from FPL's
actions, whereby the utility filed suit on January 8, 1997, to
avoid its obligations under two power sales contracts signed with
the Partnerships in 1991. On May 9, 1997, FPL unilaterally
terminated a litigation standstill agreement that had been in
place since early February.
The Partnerships have invested more than $350 million in
project development, environmental permitting, financing and
plant construction, based on FPL's contractual commitments. The
plants delivered electricity to FPL during 1996 and have been
operating, and continue to operate now, in accordance with their
respective power sales contracts, according to the Partnerships.
On behalf of the plant employees, and for the benefit of the
bondholders who helped finance the facilities, the Partnerships
issued the following statement:
Given the uncertainty created by FPL's litigation and its
efforts to avoid its contractual obligations, we have reluctantly
concluded that our most prudent course of action is a Chapter 11
filing. Through a lawsuit designed to break the contracts, FPL
would ruin these projects and deny South Florida access to an
environmentally superior, renewable source of electricity.
We consider FPL's suit to be without merit. Since the initial
phases of operations, the Partnerships have delivered electricity
to FPL under the contracts through these large-scale, renewable,
waste-fuel energy facilities.
Now, rather than embracing a new application for a proven
technology in electricity and steam production that has
substantial environmental benefits, FPL seeks to prevent the
Partnerships from operating the plants in accordance with the
projects' "standard- offer" power sales contracts,
which FPL prepared for these types of facilities in the early
We believe these plants represent an important step forward
for the people of South Florida. They were built to satisfy
growing demand for electric power and to achieve significant
environmental improvements. Further, the Partnerships fully
intend to continue operating the facilities.
We are vigorously contesting FPL's claims to void the
contracts. We are confident that FPL's claims will be seen as
being without merit. The utility is clearly not acting in the
best interests of energy consumers, the regional environment or
the State of Florida.
The plants feature the energy efficiencies associated with
cogeneration, producing two forms of energy -- electricity and
steam -- from a single source of fuel. They have substantial
environmental and economic benefits in terms of improved air and
water quality, local jobs and services, and taxes.
The plants were financed, in part, through the issuance by
Palm Beach County, Florida, of its Solid Waste Industrial
Development Revenue Bonds (Okeelanta Power Limited Partnership
Project) Series 1993A, which were originally issued in an
aggregate principal amount of $160,000,000, and its Solid Waste
Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Osceola Power Limited
Partnership Project), which were issued in two series -- the
Exempt Facility Series 1994A, issued in an aggregate principal
amount of $120,500,000, and the Taxable Series 1994B, issued in
an aggregate principal amount of $8,000,000.
Neither the faith and credit, nor the taxing power, of Palm
Beach County is pledged to the payment of the bonds. No County
taxes are pledged to the payment of the bonds. The bonds are
revenue obligations of Palm Beach County, payable solely from
certain revenues payable by the Partnerships and certain other
assets pledged therefor.
CONTACT: John Sullivan/David Allan, 212-484-6717
FPL Responds To Bankruptcy Filing By
JUNO BEACH, Fla., May 14, 1997 - Florida Power & Light
Company said it will continue to protect its customers' interests
by pursuing the lawsuit against two cogeneration power plants
that today filed for bankruptcy protection.
FPL sued the Okeelanta and Osceola Power Limited Partnerships
in Florida Circuit Court for Palm Beach County in January because
of a dispute over whether the plants achieved commercial
operation by the required date. The contracts provide that if the
plants were not in commercial operation before Jan. 1, 1997, FPL
had no further obligation under them. FPL contends that the
plants did not meet this deadline.
FPL General Counsel Dennis Coyle said both cogeneration plants
have suffered a continuous series of equipment failures and
breakdowns since the beginning of the year.
"Their performance has been so poor that even if the
contracts were still valid, they would not be entitled to any
payments. It therefore is not surprising that the owners filed
for bankruptcy protection," he said.
In 1991, FPL was required to enter into 30-year power purchase
agreements with Okeelanta and Osceola as part of the
implementation of the federal Public Utility Regulatory Policies
"The prices FPL is required to pay under these contracts
are 80 to 100 percent above the cost at which FPL could produce
the power itself or purchase it elsewhere," said Mr. Coyle.
"These excessive prices are passed through FPL's bills
directly to its customers. Thus, it is the people of Florida who
are harmed by these contracts."
"Furthermore, the plants are not the environmentally
beneficial facilities the owners portray them as being," Mr.
Coyle said. "They burn bagasse, the waste product of sugar
cane refining, only a few months a year. The rest of the time
they burn waste wood, much of which has been treated with
Recently, the owners asked for permission to burn rubber tires
as a fuel. Ash disposal is another unresolved issue. One proposal
being considered is to spread the ashes, which contain hazardous
wastes, on the Everglades, he said.
Florida Power & Light Company is the principal subsidiary
of FPL Group, Inc. (NYSE: FPL).
SOURCE Florida Power & Light Company /CONTACT: Dale
Thomas, Corporate Communications Dept., Florida Power &