With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". tension with the claim that Williams only signed in his corporate capacity. The other provisions noted above, suggesting that Williams — as the sole employee and officer of Williams Environmental — may have personal responsibilities, btittress the conclusion that the agreement is unclear and ambiguous on the corporate/personal capacity issue. We emphasize that Williams’s personal liability under the agreement may or may not be established on remand; it will depend on the evidence presented. Unlike situations where a written agreement unambiguously establishes individual liability, such as where a corporate officer assumes personal liability for a corporate obligation, the agreement at issue is ambigu ous, leaving room for interpretation. Because its language is am (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (<HOLDING>); Robert C. Malt & Co. v. Carpet World

A: holding company president personally liable after he gave a personal guarantee that 250000 will be paid
B: holding company president personally liable pursuant to language in contract stating that if companys net worth is reduced in excess of ten percent 10  then it is agreed that the company president shall guarantee the shortfall
C: holding that plaintiffs failure to mention vice president of thirdparty company in initial disclosures was harmless because plaintiffs mentioned president of company and defendants conducted no discovery of company
D: holding owner of limited liability company may be personally liable to third party if owner acts as agent for company and fails to disclose existence and identity of principal
A.