In his Monday decision, U.S. District Judge James Donato rejected claims that federal law pre-empts the United passengers’ lawsuit. He also said that United’s terms of carriage, boarding passes, and reservation screens all explicitly state that the airline would provide window seats to those who pay for them.
A federal court on Monday rejected United Airlines’ request to dismiss a lawsuit filed on behalf of passengers who say they paid extra money for window seats only to find themselves sitting against a blank wall.
According to The Guardian, U.S. District Judge James Donato dismissed United’s claims that the term “window” merely describes the location of a seat relative to the fuselage and aisle, as well as its contention that it never provided a contractual guarantee that such seats come with a view.
“The use of the word ‘window’ in reference to a particular seat cannot reasonably be interpreted as a promise that the seat will have an exterior window view,” United argued in November.
“Rather,” the airline said, “the word ‘window’ identifies the position of the seat—i.e., next ot the wall of the main body of the aircraft.”
The Guardian notes that passengers filed related class-action lawsuits against both United and Delta Air Lines in August. Most of the plaintiff-passengers’ claims relate to seats on Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321 planes.
Carter Greenbaum, an attorney representing passengers in claims against both United and Delta, told Reuters that the airline’s position is “contrary to the reasonable expectations of countless passengers who unknowingly paid extra money for windowless window seats.”
“Consumers deserve better than empty promises and United’s word games,” he said.
In a 2025 statement provided to People, Greenbaum emphasized that, in an era where airlines often charge more for less, transparency is of the utmost importance.
“As airlines have begun charging for services that were once free, passengers should at least expect upfront disclosure of the fees and that if they pay an extra fee, they will get the product they paid for,” he said at the time.
The lawsuit, which was amended in October, also noted that many passengers have non-trivial reasons for selecting window seats that actually come with a view.
“Many passengers have a fear of flying or experience anxiety, claustrophobia or motion sickness, and windows provide greater comfort in an otherwise distressing environment,” the lawsuit states. “Whatever the motivation for buying a window, had plaintiffs and the punitive class members known that they were buying windowless window seats, they would not have selected them at all, much less paid extra for them.”
In his Monday decision, U.S. District Judge James Donato also rejected claims that federal law pre-empts the United passengers’ lawsuit. He further said that United’s terms of carriage, boarding passes, and reservation screens all explicitly state that the airline would provide window seats to those who pay for them.
“No more is needed at this stage for the breach [of contract] claims to go forward,” he said.
While United must continue litigating the passengers’ claims, Delta is currently seeking a dismissal of the lawsuit pending against it.
Both lawsuits seek millions of dollars in damages.
Sources
Does a window seat on a plane need a window? United Airlines says not.
Passengers sue Delta and United over window seats that have no windows
United Airlines must face lawsuit over ‘window seats’ that lack windows
United Airlines must face lawsuit over ‘window seats’ that lack windows
Join the conversation!