United Airlines says a window seat doesn't need to have a window

"When is a window not a window? United Airlines is trying to get a lawsuit dismissed by arguing that a window seat only means one next to a wall, and not necessarily with a view. In August, United and Delta Air Lines were sued by passengers in two separate but similar suits. Both airlines were accused of unfairly charging extra for some window seats without warning that there wasn't actually a window there."

"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,' the airline's lawyers wrote. 'Rather, the word 'window' identifies the position of the seat-i.e., next to the wall of the main body of the aircraft,' they added. The lawyers also pointed to United's contract of carriage, which does not expressly promise that window seats have exterior views."

Passengers sued United and Delta alleging the airlines charged extra for window seats that lacked exterior views. United moved to dismiss, arguing the term "window" denotes a seat next to the aircraft wall rather than promising an exterior view. United's lawyers cited the contract of carriage, which does not promise exterior views for window seats. Plaintiffs said customers paid up to $169.99 for such seats and discovered only a cabin wall beside them. Boeing 737s, Airbus A320s and Boeing 757s can have missing windows because of ducts, conduits or other components. Some other carriers warn customers during booking; United and Delta allegedly did not.

Read at Business Insider