Short answer. Yes. Under Article 1219 of the Civil Code, a creditor's remission of your share does not free you from your duty toward a co-debtor who already paid the entire debt before that remission happened. By then there was nothing left to forgive on your behalf — your co-debtor had already paid it.
What the law says
The remission made by the creditor of the share which affects one of the solidary debtors does not release the latter from his responsibility towards the co-debtors, in case the debt had been totally paid by anyone of them before the remission was effected.
Civil Code, Article 1219 — Remission After the Debt Has Already Been Paid. Read the full provision →
How timing changes everything
Article 1219 addresses a specific sequence of events. A co-debtor pays the entire solidary debt — satisfying it completely and acquiring the right to recover each co-debtor's proportional share. Later, the original creditor purports to remit or waive the share of one of the remaining co-debtors. The question is: does that creditor's later forgiveness reach backward and cancel what the paying co-debtor is owed? Article 1219 answers clearly: no. The creditor can only forgive what the creditor still has — and once a co-debtor paid the whole debt, the creditor no longer held that share. The forgiveness has nothing to latch onto.
Why the co-debtor who paid can still collect from you
When one solidary co-debtor pays the entire debt, the law transfers the right to collect each party's proportional share from the creditor to that paying co-debtor. The paying co-debtor becomes, in effect, a new internal creditor of the others. The original creditor's subsequent forgiveness cannot extinguish a right that no longer belongs to that creditor — it has already been transferred to the co-debtor who paid. The remission by the original creditor is simply too late to have any effect on your responsibility toward the person who actually shouldered the whole obligation.
What if the remission came before payment?
The rule in Article 1219 is time-dependent. If the creditor had remitted your share before any co-debtor paid the full debt, the analysis would be different: the remission would reduce the total obligation, and whoever paid later would be paying a correspondingly smaller amount. Article 1219's rule applies specifically to the situation where a co-debtor already paid in full before the remission was made. The sequence matters — remission first versus payment first produces different results.
Practical consequences
If a co-debtor paid your share along with everyone else's and is now seeking reimbursement from you, the creditor's later forgiveness is not a defense. You still owe the co-debtor your proportional share of the debt. To know exactly how much that is, you need to look at any agreement among the co-debtors about how the debt was to be divided — absent such an agreement, the debt is typically presumed equal among them. The creditor's remission document is legally irrelevant to the co-debtor's claim against you.