In Pearlman v. Reliance Ins. Co., 371 U.S. 132 (1962), the U.S. Supreme Court determined whether a surety or a bankruptcy trustee had superior rights to the remaining funds on a government construction contract. The bankruptcy code, in discussing priority of interests in bankruptcy, is silent concerning the rights of sureties. Pearlman, 371 U.S. at 135. In finding for the surety, the Court noted that "a surety who pays the debt of another is entitled to all the rights of the person he paid to enforce his right to be reimbursed. This rule, widely applied in this country is generally known as the right of subrogation . . . ." Id. at 137. The Court found that the facts from both cases "followed an already established doctrine that a surety who completes a contract has an equitable right to indemnification out of a retained fund," and that it did not matter whether the surety sought compensation for finishing the project or paying the contractor's debts. Id. at 138. The Court ruled that the government was entitled to pay the remaining unpaid laborers and material providers, and that the rest of the proceeds were the surety's property. Id. at 141.