Grantham

Gregory Grantham and John Saba appeal the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s decision 1 that they were not entitled to subrogation pursuant to the provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 509 . 2 We affirm.

The bankruptcy court issued a lengthy and detailed opinion dealing with the facts and issues before it and we perceive no reason to iterate the details of its discussion. 3 Therefore, we adopt the bankruptcy court’s statements of facts in part II of its decision. In re Flamingo 55, 378 B.R. 893, 900-04 (Bankr.D.Nev.2007).

With one clarification and one exception, we also adopt the bankruptcy court’s discussion and determination denying Grant-ham and Saba’s assertion that they were entitled to subrogation pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 509 . See Flamingo 55, 378 B.R. at 919-21 (part V).

(1) Clarification:

The bankruptcy court determined that Grantham and Saba’s predecessor in interest, Broadway-Acacia, LLC, and the debt- or Flamingo 55, Inc., were partners or coventurers in a venture to develop certain property, and that the loan in question was to them for the purpose of pursuing that venture. As a result, the bankruptcy court determined that Grantham and Saba do…