Lovemore Mbigi sued Wells Fargo after the lender foreclosed on his home. His complaint alleged wrongful foreclosure, fraud and negligent misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, and related claims. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. The Court of Appeals held that several allegations had to be accepted as true at the pleading stage, including allegations that Wells Fargo induced Mbigi to stop making payments, refused payment, failed to process promised loan modifications, and proceeded with foreclosure. The court concluded that the complaint supplied a sufficient framework for wrongful-foreclosure, emotional-distress, good-faith, and promissory-estoppel theories, even though the ultimate proof remained unresolved. It affirmed dismissal of claims that lacked a viable legal basis but reversed as to the surviving claims. The court explained that the complaint need not plead every evidentiary detail or every term of an alleged promise to provide fair notice. The judgment was affirmed in part and reversed in part; one judge concurred in the judgment only because the opinion was not binding precedent under the appellate rule.