A federal judge rejected Delta Air Lines’ request to dismiss a lawsuit by passengers who said they paid extra money to sit in window seats, but found themselves seated next to windowless blank walls. U.S. District Judge Ramon Reyes in Brooklyn ruled on Wednesday that there was a reasonable dispute over whether Delta’s contract of carriage, which says the carrier “does not offer tickets or contracts to customers that guarantee particular seats,” required Delta to provide window seats to passengers who paid for them. Reyes did not decide the lawsuit’s merits. In July, a federal judge in San Francisco rejected United Airlines’ bid to dismiss a similar lawsuit. Delta declined to comment on Thursday, saying it does not discuss pending litigation. Casey Olbrantz, a lawyer for the four Delta plaintiffs, called the decision “a significant precedent in establishing that, despite federal deregulation, passengers can still hold airlines accountable when they don’t get what they paid for.” The proposed class actions were filed in August 2025 by disgruntled passengers who found themselves seated next to walls on Boeing 737, Boeing 757 and Airbus A321 planes. According to the plaintiffs, passengers typically buy window seats to address fear of flying and motion sickness, keep children occupied, get more light, or take in the view. They said the absence of windows next to their seats was not disclosed during the booking process. Aircraft walls sometimes align with operating components, such as air conditioning ducts. In seeking a dismissal of the Brooklyn case, Atlanta-based Delta said the inherent nature of airline operations, including the periodic need to substitute planes with different seating arrangements, absolved it from guaranteeing seat assignments. Both lawsuits seek millions of dollars in damages, for more than 1 million passengers per carrier. Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Bill Berkrot
