With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". we “accept as true all facts well pleaded and question only whether the plaintiff might prevail under any state of facts provable under the claim.” Cal. First Bank v. State, 1990-NMSC-106, ¶ 2,111 N.M. 64, 801 P.2d 646 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In doing so, “the complaint must be construed in a light most favorable to [the non-moving party] and with all doubts resolved in favor of its sufficiency.” Pillsbury v. Blumenthal, 1954-NMSC-066, ¶ 6, 58 N.M. 422, 272 P.2d 326. APPLICATION OF RULE 1-012(B)(6) {5} New Mexico is a notice pleading state. Zamora v. St. Vincent Hosp., 2014-NMSC-035, ¶ 10, 335 P.3d 1243. While this standard generally benefits plaintiffs in civil litigation, see Credit Inst. v. Nutrition Corp., 2003-NMCA-010, ¶ 22, 133 N.M. 248, 62 P.3d 339 (<HOLDING>), Rule 1-012(B)(6) nonetheless requires

A: holding that pleading rules are substantive
B: holding that the complaint did not satisfy the notice pleading requirements of federal rule of civil procedure 8a because the complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment
C: holding that our liberal rules of notice pleading do not require that specific evidentiary detail be alleged in the complaint
D: holding that liberal pleading standards of rules 8 and 9 applied to prayer for punitive damages
C.