Final answer:
The statement regarding the lack of capacity and discharge in bankruptcy being common defenses for a surety is false, as sureties generally remain obligated despite a principal debtor's bankruptcy, and lack of capacity is an unrelated issue.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement "Lack of capacity and discharge in bankruptcy are two common defenses that are available to a surety that may be asserted against a creditor" is False. A surety's commitment to fulfill the obligations of the principal debtor typically remains despite the principal's bankruptcy. This means that in general, the surety cannot use the principal debtor's discharge in bankruptcy as a defense. Lack of capacity might be a valid defense if the surety were legally incapable of entering into the contract, but that is unrelated to the bankruptcy of the principal. Therefore, these two defenses are not typically applicable to sureties in the context of a creditor's claim.