Plaintiff alleged that the defendant directors breached their fiduciary duties by causing TEPPCO Partners L.P. to enter into grossly unfair transactions. The Court of Chancery held that Plaintiff’s claim against “the board of directors” provided sufficient identification of individual directors serving on TEPPCO’s board of directors at the time of the transactions at issue. The defendant directors were adequately put on notice of the claims against them and the Plaintiff was entitled to the reasonable inference that the defendant directors participated in approving the transactions because they were part of the TEPPCO board at the time. Accordingly, the Court rejected the defendants’ motion to dismiss for not pleading more particularized facts regarding individual director participation in the challenged transactions
