for ERISA preemption to extend to state-law tort claims brought against an independent insurance agent. Perkins v. Time Ins. Co., 898 F.2d 470, 473 (5th Cir.1990). In Perkins, the plaintiff alleged that an independent insurance agent had fraudulently induced him to forfeit an insurance policy that covered his daughter’s condition for one that did not. Id. The Court held that “a state law claim of that genre, which does not affect the relations among the principal ERISA entities (the employer, the plan fiduciaries, the plan, and the beneficiaries) as such, is not preempted by ERISA.” Id. (emphasis added). “[A] claim that an insurance agent fraudulently induced an insured to surrender coverage under an existing policy, to participate in an ERISA plan which did not provi th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Instead of seeking insurance proceeds under
holding negligent misrepresentation claim was not preempted because it neither sought benefits under plan nor alleged improper processing of benefits holding that claims for misrepresentation fraud and texas dtpa violations brought pursuant to article 2121 of the texas insurance code were completely preempted by erisa even if the result left the plaintiff with no adequate remedy for fraud holding plaintiffs statelaw claims alleging common law misrepresentation and statutory misrepresentation under the texas insurance code art 2121 not preempted because they were not dependent on  the right to recover benefits under the erisa plan holding that claims for misrepresentation under texas insurance code were preempted because the plaintiffs sought to recover benefits under an erisa plan holding that erisa did not preempt hospitals claims against erisa plan administrator for misrepresentation under texas insurance code because hospitals claims were not dependent on or derived from the beneficiarys right to recover benefits under the plan