With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in the case of guardianship bonds). 5 . In re Pacheco, 219 Ariz. 421, 199 P.3d 676, 682 (Ariz.Ct.App.2008); but see, e.g., Bolmer v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 11 F.Supp. 560, 563 (W.D.Ky.1935) ("The liability on the bond does not extend to prior defaults of the committee before its execution.”). 6 . See, e.g., Md. Cas. Co. v. Waldrep, 126 F.2d 555, 559 (10th Cir.1942) ("[I]n Oklahoma the surety on a second or subsequent general bond of a guardian which does not expressly limit liability to losses occurring after a fixed date is liable for any loss arising out of a failure faithfully to execute the duties of the trust, even though the breach occurred prior to the execution of the bond.”); First Nat’l Bank & Trust Co. in Minneapolis v. Nat’l Sur. Corp., 25 F.Supp. 392, 398 (D.Minn.1938) (<HOLDING>); Suffolk Cnty. Trust Co. v. Nat’l Sur. Corp.,

A: holding that the acts of a corporate officer done in his or her official capacity are acts of the corporation
B: holding president and vicepresident of real estate corporation accountable for discriminatory acts of their agents whether or not the officers directed or authorized the particular discriminatory acts that occurred
C: holding that the surety was not liable for losses arising out of guardians acts prior to issuance of bond because the bond agreement was clear and free from ambiguity and made it evident that the parties intended that the surety corporation should not assume liability for losses already sustained or losses to be sustained by acts of wrongdoing or carelessness of the principal which had already occurred
D: holding that the parties choice to require arbitration for disputes which arise under a contract when the standard language was arising out of or relating to demonstrated that the parties intended the agreement to be narrow
C.