New York State Supreme Court: "[Dell] engaged in fraud, false advertising, deceptive business, and abusive debt collection practices."
Dell: "That's not true!¹ We only defrauded some of our customers."
I don't think I understand Dell's definition of "not true". But maybe it's one of those things that depends on what you mean by "is". New York State charges that Dell offered no-interest or delayed-payment financing terms that its financial services department, after the fact, refused to honor. I completely fail to see how the fact that Dell only did this to some customers changes the fact that they did it. It seems sort of like pleading innocence of being a habitual drunken driver on the grounds that you only got busted for DUI three times.
[1] Well, technically, Dell didn't say the finding wasn't true, just that they disagreed with it. But that's a bit of a distinction without a difference under the cirumstances.