11 U.S.C. § 509

Claims of codebtors

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 11 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, an entity that is liable with the debtor on, or that has secured, a claim of a creditor against the debtor, and that pays such claim, is subrogated to the rights of such creditor to the extent of such payment.(b) Such entity is not subrogated to the rights of such creditor to the extent that—(1) a claim of such entity for reimbursement or contribution on account of such payment of such creditor’s claim is—(A) allowed under section 502 of this title;(B) disallowed other than under section 502(e) of this title; or(C) subordinated under section 510 of this title; or(2) as between the debtor and such entity, such entity received the consideration for the claim held by such creditor.(c) The court shall subordinate to the claim of a creditor and for the benefit of such creditor an allowed claim, by way of subrogation under this section, or for reimbursement or contribution, of an entity that is liable with the debtor on, or that has secured, such creditor’s claim, until such creditor’s claim is paid in full, either through payments under this title or otherwise.(Pub. L. 95–598, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2585; Pub. L. 98–353, title III, § 450, July 10, 1984, 98 Stat. 375.)Historical and Revision Noteslegislative statements

Section 509 of the House amendment represents a substantial revision of provisions contained in H.R. 8200 as passed by the House and in the Senate amendment. Section 509(a) states a general rule that a surety or co-debtor is subrogated to the rights of a creditor assured by the surety or co-debtor to the extent the surety or co-debtor pays such creditor. Section 509(b) states a general exception indicating that subrogation is not granted to the extent that a claim of a surety or co-debtor for reimbursement or contribution is allowed under section 502 or disallowed other than under section 502(e). Additionally, section 509(b)(1)(C) provides that such claims for subrogation are subordinated to the extent that a claim of the surety or co-debtor for reimbursement or contribution is subordinated under section 510(a)(1) or 510(b). Section 509(b)(2) reiterates the well-known rule that prevents a debtor that is ultimately liable on the debt from recovering from a surety or a co-debtor. Although the language in section 509(b)(2) focuses in terms of receipt of consideration, legislative history appearing elsewhere indicates that an agreement to share liabilities should prevail over an agreement to share profits throughout title 11. This is particularly important in the context of co-debtors who are partners. Section 509(c) subordinates the claim of a surety or co-debtor to the claim of an assured creditor until the creditor’s claim is paid in full.

senate report no. 95–989

Section 509 deals with codebtors generally, and is in addition to the disallowance provision in section 502(e). This section is based on the notion that the only rights available to a surety, guarantor, or comaker are contribution, reimbursement, and subrogation. The right that applies in a particular situation will depend on the agreement between the debtor and the codebtor, and on whether and how payment was made by the codebtor to the creditor. The claim of a surety or codebtor for contribution or reimbursement is discharged even if the claim is never filed, as is any claim for subrogation even if the surety or codebtor chooses to file a claim for contribution or reimbursement instead.

Subsection (a) subrogates the codebtor (whether as a codebtor, surety, or guarantor) to the rights of the creditor, to the extent of any payment made by the codebtor to the creditor. Whether the creditor’s claim was filed under section 501(a) or 501(b) is irrelevant. The right of subrogation will exist even if the primary creditor’s claim is allowed by virtue of being listed under proposed 11 U.S.C. 924 or 1111, and not by reason of a proof of claim.

Subsection (b) permits a subrogated codebtor to receive payments in the bankruptcy case only if the creditor has been paid in full, either through payments under the bankruptcy code or otherwise.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1984—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–353, § 450(a), substituted “subsection (b) or” for “subsections (b) and”, and inserted “against the debtor” after “a creditor”.

Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 98–353, § 450(b), substituted “of such” for “of a” after “account”.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 98–353, § 450(c), substituted “this section” for “section 509 of this title”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–353 effective with respect to cases filed 90 days after July 10, 1984, see section 552(a) of Pub. L. 98–353, set out as a note under section 101 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 184 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: In Re Valley Vue Joint Venture
In Re Valley Vue Joint Venture (1991) vaeb · cites it 16× “Rodgers asserts that it is entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the Bank of Baltimore pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 509 (a) and general principles of equity.”
In Re Flamingo 55, Inc. (2007) nvb · cites it 6× “1992) (under 11 U.S.C. § 509 ; finding copartners who paid partnership taxes were not entitled to a subro-gated claim based on payment of taxes); Ridge v.”
Aguiluz v. Bayhi (In Re Bayhi) (2008) ca5 · cites it 6× “11 U.S.C. § 509 (b)(1). As a subrogation claim, Aguiluz's assertion would fail under bankruptcy law and many states' law because he "received consideration for the claim held by the creditor.”
In Re Trasks' Charolais (1988) sdb · cites it 7× “See also 11 U.S.C. § 509 (c). This holding is based on the following discussion.”
In Re James S. Hamada, Debtor. James S. Hamada v. Far East National Bank, a California Corporation (2002) ca9 · cites it 3× “§ 509 (a), which provides: Except as provided in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, an entity that is liable with the debtor on, or that has secured, a claim of a creditor against the debtor, and that pays such claim, is subrogated to the rights of such creditor to the…”
In Re Fiesole Trading Corp. (2004) mab · cites it 7× “In the context of a bankruptcy case, an entity’s right of subrogation has been examined under either or both of two theories: 11 U.S.C. § 509 and state law doctrines of equitable subrogation.”
McAllister Towing v. Ambassador Factors, Division Fleet Factors Corp. (In Re Topgallant Lines, Inc.) (1993) gasd · cites it 6× “Whether FABC, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 509 , may be subrogated to the rights of maritime lien claimants whose claims it satisfied.”
Scott v. American Security Insurance Co. (In re Scott) (2017) nysb · cites it 3× “Count Two: Breach of Contract, Violation of 11 U.S.C. § 509 (b)(2) Prohibiting Subro-gation To Compensated Insurer In Count Two, the Debtor asserts that by charging the forced placed insurance premium to the Mortgage, ASIC contracted with the Debtor, Campbell and…”
Giuliano v. Ins. Co. of Pa. (In re LTC Holdings, Inc.) (2019) deb · cites it 6× “First, can a surety's action, short of actual payment, "effectively discharge" a debt and constitute full payment for purposes of subrogation, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 509 , when the obligee has not accepted that action as full payment? The Court holds that it can not.”
Meyer v. Hill (In Re Hill) (2001) bap9 · cites it 2× “11 U.S.C. § 509 (a). Section 1301 provides for a codebtor stay of any act to collect a consumer debt: .”
In Re Russell (1989) arwb · cites it 4× “11 U.S.C. § 509 provides as follows: (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) or (c) of this section, an entity that is liable with the debtor on, or that has secured, a claim of a creditor against the debtor, and that pays such claim, is sub-rogated to the rights of such…”
Park Restoration, LLC v. Trs. of Conneaut Lake Park, Inc. (In re Trs. of Conneaut Lake Park, Inc.) (2018) pawb · cites it 14× “Park Restoration is asserting its claim pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 509 because such claims of the taxing authorities (the " Taxing Authorities ") 2 were previously paid during the pendency of this case from proceeds of a fire insurance policy obtained by Park Restoration.”
— 11 U.S.C. § 509(a) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.