A claim for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty fails if a plaintiff cannot allege an underlying breach. In that circumstance there is no breach to aid and abet. Where a plaintiff sufficiently alleges a breach, however, it still also must allege, in nonconclusory terms, facts sufficient to show knowing participation in the alleged breach to state a claim for aiding and abetting. In Jacobs v. Meghi, C. A. No. 2019-1022-MTZ (Del. Ch. Oct. 8, 2020), the Delaware Court of Chancery parsed the allegations of plaintiff's complaint to conclude that it had failed to allege "specific facts supporting an inference of knowing participation in a breach" and dismissed plaintiff's complaint against the alleged aider and abettor. As explained below, the court also denied the plaintiff's claim for unjust enrichment.