Southwest Airlines Hit With Class Action for Failing to Refund Canceled Flights
The suit argues that the company's policy of offering credits for canceled flights violates its contract with customers and federal law.
April 14, 2020 at 04:32 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Legal Intelligencer
Attorneys from Philadelphia to Sherman Oaks, California, have filed a class action lawsuit against Southwest Airlines for allegedly failing to provide reimbursements for flights canceled as a result of the coronavirus.
Four firms filed the lawsuit, captioned Bombin v. Southwest Airlines, Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The suit argues that the company's policy of offering credits for canceled flights violates its contract with customers and federal law.
Philadelphia attorney James Shah of Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah filed the suit, along with attorneys Jeff Ostrow of Kopelowitz Ostrow Ferguson Weiselberg Gilbert in Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Hassan Zavareei of Tycko & Zavareei in Washington, D.C.; and Pearson, Simon & Warshaw lawyers Melissa Weiner in Minneapolis and Daniel Warshaw in Sherman Oaks.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a Pennsylvania man whose flight was canceled last month due to the ongoing outbreak of the coronavirus.
"Despite the fact that plaintiff could not take the flight he booked, and defendant could not offer any comparable accommodations on another flight, plaintiff was not given a refund, but was only offered a credit for use on a future flight," the plaintiff said in his 14-page complaint.
The lawsuit is similar to a pair of class action suits that were filed against United Airlines earlier this month. Both of those suits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Daniel Herrera of Cafferty Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel and Joseph Sauder of Sauder Schelkopf filed one of those suits, and Hagens Berman Sobol & Shapiro lawyer Steve Berman filed the other.
Like the suits filed in Illinois, the class action in Pennsylvania federal court also focuses in part on the U.S. Department of Transportation's mandate that airlines fully refund passengers whose flights were canceled in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to the complaint, in late February plaintiff Adrian Bombin bought a ticket to fly from BWI Airport to Havana, Cuba. A few days later, however, Southwest canceled flights to Havana as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. The complaint said that by late March, the company announced it was canceling about 1,500 flights each day, or about 40%, of its normal daily service.
On April 3, the DOT issued an enforcement notice saying airlines are obligated to refund passengers for flights that were canceled or significantly changed in ways that were not acceptable for the customer.
According to the complaint, after the cancellations, Dallas-based Southwest offered passengers to either rebook their flights to a different route that had not been canceled, or to obtain a travel credit. However, Bombin alleged that Southwest's Contract of Carriage mandates that when the carrier cancels flights, the company must provide for refunds, rather than credits.
Given the contract's provisions, and the DOT's mandate, Bombin alleged the carrier needs to provide refunds for all customers whose flights were canceled beginning in early March.
"Here, plaintiff was not given the choice of being transported on the next available flight at no additional charge. His flight was canceled and there were no alternative Southwest flights to accommodate him from the trip's origin (BWI) to his destination," Bombin said in the complaint. "He had not used any portion of the ticket for his trip. Thus, pursuant to the terms of the Contract of Carriage, plaintiff is entitled to a refund of the fare for the entire trip in U.S. dollars to his original form of payment."
The suit raises a single breach of contract claim.
In an emailed statement, a spokesman for Southwest said the company has some of the most "customer-friendly policies in the industry."
"If a flight is cancelled by Southwest, customers may select a new flight between the same origin and destination on any date (currently extended until 60 days from the original date of travel) without paying any difference in fare, may receive travel funds for future use (currently extended to June 30, 2021), or may request a refund to the original form of payment," spokesman Brian Parrish said. "Southwest will review this complaint and will defend our policies accordingly as our focus is always on taking care of our customers, especially during these unprecedented times."
According to the docket, the suit has been assigned to Judge John Gallagher.
Shah did not return a message seeking comment.
READ THE COMPLAINT:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWith DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
7 minute readMoFo Associate Sees a Familiar Face During Her First Appellate Argument: Justice Breyer
Amid the Tragedy of the L.A. Fires, a Lesson on the Value of Good Neighbors
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1The Rise and Risks of Merchant Cash Advance Debt Relief Companies
- 2Ill. Class Action Claims Cannabis Companies Sell Products with Excessive THC Content
- 3Suboxone MDL Mostly Survives Initial Preemption Challenge
- 4Paul Hastings Hires Music Industry Practice Chair From Willkie in Los Angeles
- 5Global Software Firm Trying to Jump-Start Growth Hands CLO Post to 3-Time Legal Chief
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250