With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 248 N.Y. 339, 162 N.E. 99, 100 (1928). Even though the existence of a duty-owing from the co-employee to the injured worker necessarily depends upon the particular circumstances and upon policy considerations, our cases do offer some guidance as to when this duty will be imposed. As noted by the court in Sexton, Davis, and Lyon, cases that have recognized that the “something more” element had been met, the supervisor/co-employee was present at the time of the injury, and had personally performed an act or operated a piece of equipment that resulted in the injury, or had directed the fellow worker to engage in dangerous activities. Sexton v. Jenkins & Associates, Inc., 41 S.W.3d 1, 5 (Mo.App. W.D.2000); Davis, 936 S.W.2d at 864; Lyon, 960 S.W.2d at 526; See Hedglin, 903 S.W.2d at 927(<HOLDING>); Craft, 715 S.W.2d at 537-8(holding president

A: holding officer personally liable because he agreed to personally guarantee payment on an account
B: holding supervisor personally liable for death of employee where supervisor personally arranged for employee to be dangled from the tines of a forklift over a vat of scalding water into which employee fell and died
C: holding that employee stated claim by alleging he was wrongfully discharged for refusing to commit criminal act for which he would be held personally liable
D: holding that due to the csra a federal employee has no independent right of action for damages against a supervisor who improperly disciplined the employee for exercising his first amendment rights
B.