Whether FELA preempts bad-faith claims under Montana law that seek to impose state-law liability based on the litigation conduct of a self-insured employer sued under FELA

QUESTION PRESENTED The Federal Employers Liability Act (“(FELA”), 45 U.S.C. § 51, establishes a “comprehensive” and “exclusive” federal framework governing railroads’ liability for their employees’ on-the-job injuries. N.Y. Cent. R.R. Co. v. Winfield, 244 U.S. 147, 151 (1917). In Montana, however, a self-insured employer who is sued under FELA owes additional state-law duties to the plaintiff, beyond those established by FELA, that exist in no other jurisdiction. If the employer’s FELA liability is reasonably clear, Montana law requires that it immediately advance the plaintiffs wages and medical expenses during the pendency of the suit, and that it enter into a “prompt, fair, and equitable settlement.” If the employer fails to satisfy these state-law duties because, for example, it chooses to contest the merits of the plaintiffs FELA claim, the employer is subject to a follow-on bad-faith suit under Montana law that exposes the employer to additional liability not authorized by FELA. The question presented is: Whether FELA preempts bad-faith claims under Montana law that seek to impose state-law liability based on the litigation conduct of a self-insured employer sued under FELA.