With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the agreement cannot override the allegations of BugWare’s complaint for purposes of a motion to dismiss. As such, dismissal of Williams with prejudice was improper at this stage in the proceedings. REVERSED and REMANDED. WETHERELL and WINOKUR, JJ., concur. 1 . Williams and Williams Environmental jointly responded to the initial complaint by filing an answer, affirmative defenses, and a counterclaim — their motion defining themselves collectively as "Williams.” -They subsequently defined themselves separately after the amended complaint was filed, which- Bug-Ware claims amounted to taking inconsistent positions. Because we resolve this case on other grounds, we need not address Bug-Ware’s claim. 2 . Great Lakes Prods., Inc. v. Wojciechowski, 878 So.2d 418, 419 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (<HOLDING>); Lab. Corp. of Am. v. McKown, 829 So.2d 311,

A: holding company president personally liable after he gave a personal guarantee that 250000 will be paid
B: holding that state officials may be personally liable for actions taken in their official capacity
C: holding officer personally liable because he agreed to personally guarantee payment on an account
D: holding defendants personally liable for alleged conversion even when acting in corporate capacity
C.