In the intricate world of Suits, the question of when Daniel Hardman finally faces the consequences of his actions is pivotal. Daniel Hardman is effectively fired in Season 2, Episode 16, “War,” although the term “fired” isn’t explicitly used; he is compelled to resign under pressure, effectively ending his tenure at Pearson Hardman.
Hardman’s Machiavellian Maneuvers: A Deep Dive
Daniel Hardman, a name synonymous with ambition and underhanded tactics within the legal drama Suits, is a character fans love to hate. His return to Pearson Hardman (later Pearson Specter Litt) sent ripples of unease throughout the firm, and his subsequent actions cemented his status as a formidable antagonist. Understanding the context of his ultimate departure requires tracing his manipulative journey from the very beginning.
The Return of the Prodigal (Troublemaker)
After a period of absence following allegations of embezzlement, Hardman resurfaces, claiming to be reformed and ready to contribute positively to the firm. However, it quickly becomes apparent that his ambitions remain unchecked and his methods questionable. He aims not just to participate but to seize control, undermining Jessica Pearson at every opportunity.
The Power Struggle Intensifies
The second season of Suits becomes a battleground for power between Jessica Pearson and Daniel Hardman. He uses his legal acumen and connections to challenge Jessica’s leadership, exploiting vulnerabilities and planting seeds of doubt among the firm’s partners. His strategies include:
- Exploiting Internal Conflicts: Hardman identifies and amplifies existing tensions within the firm, turning colleagues against each other to weaken Jessica’s support base.
- Manipulating Cases: He interferes with ongoing cases, deliberately creating problems to make Jessica and her team look incompetent.
- Leveraging Personal Information: Hardman delves into the personal lives of his colleagues, using sensitive information to blackmail and control them.
- Public Relations Games: He stages calculated public relations moves to portray himself as a responsible and ethical leader, contrasting sharply with Jessica’s perceived failings.
The Final Straw: The Ava Hessington Case
The Ava Hessington case proves to be the catalyst for Hardman’s undoing. His involvement in the affair, including sabotaging the defense and manipulating evidence to incriminate Harvey Specter, is ultimately revealed. This egregious act of betrayal exposes the full extent of his depravity and provides Jessica with the ammunition she needs to force his resignation.
The Showdown: “War” and Hardman’s Forced Exit
The episode “War” is appropriately named. It is a full-blown confrontation where Jessica, Harvey, and Mike Ross strategically expose Hardman’s wrongdoings. They gather evidence, rally support within the firm, and confront him with undeniable proof of his betrayal in the Ava Hessington case. Facing overwhelming evidence and the unified opposition of his colleagues, Hardman is left with no choice but to resign. Though he is not formally “fired,” the pressure and circumstances compel his departure.
The Fallout
Hardman’s departure is a significant victory for Jessica and the firm. It restores stability and allows them to move forward without the constant threat of his machinations. However, his actions leave a lasting impact, forcing Jessica to re-evaluate her leadership style and prompting Harvey to question his own loyalty. While Hardman is gone, the scars of his reign remain, reminding everyone of the importance of vigilance and integrity in the high-stakes world of corporate law.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Hardman’s Departure
Here are some frequently asked questions about Daniel Hardman’s exit from Pearson Hardman, offering further insight into the circumstances and implications.
FAQ 1: Was Daniel Hardman Ever Actually Fired From Pearson Hardman Initially?
No, Daniel Hardman was not initially fired from Pearson Hardman. He was forced to take a leave of absence after accusations of embezzling funds from client accounts. This departure, however, wasn’t a formal termination but rather a period of exile. He returns to the firm later, setting the stage for the events leading to his final expulsion.
FAQ 2: What Specific Actions Led to His Ultimate Resignation?
His downfall was primarily due to his manipulation of the Ava Hessington case. He deliberately sabotaged the defense, attempted to frame Harvey Specter, and manipulated evidence to achieve his personal and professional goals. These actions, when exposed, proved to be the final straw.
FAQ 3: Did Hardman Leave Voluntarily or Was He Forced Out?
While technically a resignation, it was a forced departure. Faced with overwhelming evidence of his misconduct and the unified opposition of the firm, Hardman had no viable alternative. He chose to resign rather than face a formal vote of no confidence, which would have been even more damaging to his reputation.
FAQ 4: What Was the Significance of the Ava Hessington Case in Hardman’s Downfall?
The Ava Hessington case was pivotal because it revealed the depth of Hardman’s corruption. His willingness to compromise the firm’s reputation and potentially ruin lives to achieve his goals was a clear indication that he was unfit to lead. This case provided Jessica and Harvey with the undeniable proof they needed to remove him.
FAQ 5: Did Mike Ross Play a Role in Exposing Hardman?
Yes, Mike Ross played a crucial role. His unique abilities and understanding of legal complexities allowed him to uncover critical pieces of evidence that exposed Hardman’s deception. His partnership with Harvey and Jessica was essential in bringing Hardman’s schemes to light.
FAQ 6: What Happened to Hardman After He Left Pearson Hardman?
After being forced to resign, Hardman disappears from the main storyline for a period. He later resurfaces, attempting to undermine the firm once again, proving his animosity towards Pearson Specter Litt remained strong. His subsequent appearances showcase his relentless ambition and inability to accept defeat.
FAQ 7: Did Hardman Ever Successfully Sue Pearson Specter Litt?
While Hardman attempts to cause significant legal and reputational damage to Pearson Specter Litt on multiple occasions, he does not successfully sue the firm in a way that irreparably harms them. His actions are largely thwarted by the combined efforts of Jessica, Harvey, and their allies.
FAQ 8: Was Jessica Pearson Motivated by Personal Vendetta or Professional Ethics in Ousting Hardman?
Both factors played a role. While there was undoubtedly a personal element stemming from Hardman’s past betrayal and attempts to usurp her leadership, Jessica was also driven by a strong sense of professional ethics. She recognized that Hardman’s actions jeopardized the firm’s integrity and threatened its future.
FAQ 9: How Did Hardman’s Departure Affect the Firm’s Reputation?
Initially, Hardman’s actions damaged the firm’s reputation, creating a sense of instability and mistrust. However, Jessica’s decisive action in removing him ultimately restored confidence and demonstrated the firm’s commitment to ethical conduct. It showcased that the firm prioritized integrity over individual ambition.
FAQ 10: Did Hardman’s Actions Have Any Lasting Impact on Harvey Specter?
Yes. Hardman’s betrayal forces Harvey to confront his own moral compass and question his past decisions. He learns valuable lessons about trust, loyalty, and the importance of standing up for what is right, even when it comes at a personal cost.
FAQ 11: Could Hardman Have Redeemed Himself?
While the Suits writers never provided a pathway for Hardman’s redemption, the possibility remains a subject of fan debate. His deep-seated ambition and willingness to compromise his ethics suggest that a genuine transformation would have been exceptionally difficult. His actions often lacked a sincere sense of remorse, hindering any potential path to atonement.
FAQ 12: Who Benefited Most from Hardman’s Downfall?
Jessica Pearson ultimately benefited the most, solidifying her position as the firm’s leader and demonstrating her unwavering commitment to its success. Harvey Specter also benefited, growing both professionally and personally by overcoming the challenges posed by Hardman’s actions. The firm as a whole was strengthened by the removal of a corrupt influence.