UPDATE; April 20th, 2020
Its fast approaching a year since Vic’s arrest on national TV. However, Vic’s still showing a green light on his State Bar of Texas profile, meaning despite being caught “red handed” with a variety of over 26 drugs and the Texas Bar could actually suspend him if they wanted.
His law firm has now taken down the website. Whether they are forming a new law firm is one we’ll track, as that is usually the case in instances like here and bad Texas lawyers get caught in criminal acts.
UPDATE; December 28th, 2019
Its been five long months since Vic’s arrest on national TV. However, Vic’s still showing a green light on his State Bar of Texas profile, meaning despite being caught “red handed” with a variety of over 26 drugs which law officers claim was very unusual and a clear sign of intent to distribute, the Texas Bar states (in the video below), “it is helpless to do anything UNTIL a conviction”.
We disagree, suspension is an option and this is a clear case where it should be applied.
His law firm has removed his profile from the page of attorneys, at least for the time being, BUT his email is still the same on the State Bar profile, e.g. the company email. Perhaps he’s up in Manhattan as he is licensed to trade as an attorney in NY and able to celebrate the Macy’s New Year celebrations, and perhaps while enjoying some recreational downtime… check back in 2020 for further spotlight updates from LIT, we’re always on fire when it comes to Texas lawyers.
Sheriff’s police pulled over an Austin, Texas, lawyer for failing to signal a lane change last weekend and found drugs in his car in a search recorded for the cable TV show Live PD.
Lawyer Victor Hardy, 50, was charged with possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, the Austin American-Statesman reports. Williamson County deputies had allowed the show Live PD to record and broadcast the search, according to KXAN.
An affidavit said a police dog was alerted during a sniff of Hardy’s BMW, leading to a police search that turned up suspected marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine, psilocybin mushrooms, suspected LSD, suspected heroin, Xanax and ecstasy.
Hardy, who was an intellectual property attorney at Hardy, Parrish, Yang, is no longer listed on the firm’s website. His former bio said he had extensive experience in high-stakes patent infringement litigation and other types of litigation. He is a 1994 graduate of the University of Texas School of Law and has a 1997 LLM from Harvard Law School, the bio said.
Hardy also is licensed in New York, his bio said. He had tried four homicide cases as a special assistant district attorney in Kings County, New York.
He has no public record of discipline in New York or Texas. He did not answer a call placed to a number listed by the State Bar of Texas.
WHERE'S THE H in HAPPY?
About Victor Hardy
Victor Hardy has over 20 years of experience in high-stakes patent infringement litigation and other types of litigation and PTO proceedings.
Victor Hardy specializes in internet search and multimedia streaming technology and has successfully enforced campaigns against both industries under multiple portfolios.
Victor has had extensive involvement in nearly every aspect of trials in many different contexts, ranging from the cross-examination of Johnson & Johnson’s World Wide Chairman of Consumer Products in a patent infringement trial to arguing to the Patent and Trial and Appeal Board.
Mr. Victor Hardy Attorney is also highly experienced in patent finance and investment, patent negotiation and acquisition, patent valuation, due diligence, and strategic enforcement of IP assets.
Mr. Hardy was founding member of a pioneering patent acquisition private equity fund. Mr. Hardy has evaluated thousands of patents for purposes of business investment and enforcement for leading IP investment institutions.
Victor Hardy Attorney uses his extensive litigation experience to bring a real world perspective to financial modeling and valuation of patent assets.
Additionally, Mr. Hardy has substantial experience in class action civil rights matters including discrimination under Title VII and the ADEA.
Mr. Hardy has represented the plaintiff in Personal Audio v. Acer et al/Google et al. over the Google Play and XBOX Music products.
Mr. Hardy resolved disputes with 13 defendants and is in active litigation with Google.
Personal Audio has had significant victories before the PTAB with its patents involved in these litigations.
Victor Hardy represented the plaintiff in Preservation Technologies v. Netflix et al., an industry wide patent infringement lawsuit involving foundational patents in video streaming systems.
Mr. Hardy has resolved disputes with 85% of the video streaming industry and is in active litigation with the adult film industry.
Mr. Hardy represented the plaintiff in Software Rights Archive v. Google et al, an industry-wide patent infringement case involving foundational patents directed towards non-semantic search engine algorithms.
Mr. Hardy has resolved disputes with 99% of the search industry and is in active litigation with the social network industry.
Victor Hardy Attorney represented sixteen plaintiffs in EEOC v. Allied Aviation , a class action racial discrimination lawsuit.
This case resulted in the largest settlement in the history of the Dallas office of the EEOC. It garnered national media attention in the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, as well as being featured on several national news broadcasts including Anderson Cooper’s 360 on CNN.
Mr. Hardy was a senior member of the trial team for plaintiff Applera Corp. in Applera and Roche Molecular Systems v. MJ Research, a patent infringement, unfair competition, and antitrust suit involving the enforcement of six patents directed to the Nobel Prize-winning gene amplification process called the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and thermal cycling instruments used to automate PCR.
PCR has been hailed as one of the 100 greatest inventions of mankind. After a four week jury trial in the District of Connecticut, the jury found all six patents infringed, and four of them wilfully infringed, and the Court awarded nearly $50 million in damages.
In addition, Mr. Hardy successfully obtained the dismissal of the defendant’s antitrust tying counterclaims and patent misuse defenses on the eve of trial.
Victor Hardy represented Universal Instruments in Aguayo v. Universal Instruments, a patent infringement case involving assembly machines for printed circuit boards. The case was tried to a jury and settled on highly favorable terms. Mr. Hardy was a senior member of the trial team for defendant Bayer Corporation in McNeil-PPC, Inc. v. Bayer Corporation, a patent infringement lawsuit.
McNeil, the makers of Tylenol, sued Bayer for its production of Bayer Aspirin gelcaps. After a five week jury trial and the dismissal of one of the patents in suit and the plaintiffs’ willful infringement claims, the case was settled on terms favorable to the client.
Mr. Hardy represented defendant Compal Electronics in an industry-wide patent infringement suit involving power management in notebook computers, desktop PCs, and monitors.
He successfully obtained summary judgment of claims being asserted against Compal and its subsidiaries.
Victor Hardy Attorney was one of the trial counsel for defendant Delta Air Lines, Inc. in Process Resources v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., a patent infringement suit involving three-layer composite thermal paper used in airline baggage tags. The case was favorably settled days before the trial was to begin.
Mr. Hardy represented CompUSA in a turnover proceeding brought by the debtor Tomorrow’s Toys. The case was favorably settled for an amount that was a small fraction of what the plaintiff was seeking.
Victor is lead counsel in pursing Banco Inverlat’s claim for failure to deliver securities in the Socimer liquidation proceedings pending in the Bahamas.
Mr. Hardy represented the creditors of Transmarketing Houston in a preference action against Aquilla Gas. After a five day bench trial, the Court set aside as a preference 1.8 million dollar transfer at issue.
Victor Hardy represented the creditors of Transmarketing Houston in a breach of fiduciary duty action against the former owners of TMHI. The case was eventually resolved after a jury trial where the creditors committee recovered a 12 million dollar jury verdict