Short answer. Yes. Under Article 200 of the Family Code, when there is urgent need and special circumstances, a judge may order just one of multiple support obligors to furnish support provisionally. That obligor can then recover the other's proportional share through a separate action.
What the law says
in case of urgent need and by special circumstances, the judge may order only one of them to furnish the support provisionally, without prejudice to his right to claim from the other obligors the share due from them
Family Code, Article 200 — Dividing the Support Obligation; Competing Claims. Read the full provision →
The normal rule: proportional sharing
When two or more people are legally obliged to support the same person, Article 200 sets the default: the obligation is divided between them in proportion to the resources of each. A wealthier obligor pays more; a less wealthy one pays less. This proportional split prevents one obligor from bearing an unfair burden simply because they are more reachable or have more assets. Under ordinary circumstances, both obligors contribute simultaneously.
The urgent-need exception: ordering one to pay all
The law recognizes that collecting support proportionally from two people at once — perhaps in two separate proceedings, in different locations — can take time you do not have. For urgent situations, Article 200 gives the court flexibility: it may order only one of the obligors to furnish the full support provisionally. This provisional order is entered while the bigger picture is sorted out. The obligor who pays does not absorb a permanent windfall for the other — Article 200 expressly preserves the right to claim reimbursement of the other obligor's share.
What 'urgent need' and 'special circumstances' mean
The statute does not define these terms precisely, leaving room for the judge to assess the situation. Urgency typically means you cannot wait: you need food, medicine, shelter, or school fees now and the normal proportional process would cause real harm by the time it concludes. Special circumstances might include one obligor being unreachable, incapacitated, or living abroad, making an immediate proportional order practically impossible to enforce. The court's power here is discretionary — you present the facts and the judge decides whether the threshold is met.
The reimbursement right and competing claimants
The obligor who pays provisionally does not simply absorb the other's share. Article 200 makes clear that the paying obligor retains the right to claim the share due from the other obligors. That right can be enforced once the provisional arrangement is converted into a final order or through a separate action. Article 200 also addresses a different scenario: when one person must support two or more claimants simultaneously but does not have enough means to satisfy everyone. In that case, the priority rules from the preceding article apply — except that between a spouse and a child under parental authority, the child comes first.