With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to proceed only against Bloom, the diverse defendant, based on the defendants being inextricably intertwined, was inconsistent with the defendants’ position in circuit court that the statute of limitations had run. After a careful review of the record, we are not persuaded by this argument. The equitable estoppel doctrine has frequently been employed to bar inequitable reliance on a statute of limitations. A party will be estopped from asserting the statute of limitations defense to an admittedly untimely action where his conduct has induced another into forbearing suit within the applicable limitations period. Alachua County v. Cheshire, 603 So.2d 1334, 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (citations omitted)(emphasis added). Accord, Morsani v. Major League Baseball, 739 So.2d 610 (Fla. 2d DCA)(<HOLDING>), petition for review filed, Case No. 96,004

A: recognizing cause of action for equitable estoppel under erisa
B: holding that the 120day filing period is subject to equitable tolling and addressing circumstances warranting equitable tolling
C: recognizing difference between tolling and equitable estoppel
D: holding that the timely filing of an eeoc charge is subject to waiver estoppel and equitable tolling
C.