months prior to Sarb making the request. With respect to the second 

client, Sarb appeared at a hearing on behalf of the client in December 

2011, even though he was suspended from the practice of law. In both 

matters, Sarb failed to respond to numerous attempts by the clients to 

ascertain the status of their cases, failed to personally inform them that he 

was terminating his representation, and failed to propel their pending 

matters forward in a diligent manner. 

Sarb failed to respond to the State Bar's complaints alleging 

the foregoing. See SCR 105(2) (if an attorney fails to respond to a State 

Bar complaint, the charges shall be deemed admitted). The matters were 

consolidated and proceeded to a hearing. Although he was personally 

served with notice of the hearing, Sarb did not appear or otherwise 

participate in the proceeding. 

The panel found that Sarb violated RPC 1.3 (diligence), RPC 

1.4 (communication), RPC 1.5 (fees), RPC 1.16 (declining or terminating 

representation), RPC 5.5 (unauthorized practice of law), RPC 8.1(b) (bar 

admission and disciplinary matters), and RPC 8.4(c) and (d) (misconduct). 

While the panel found Sarb's lack of a prior disciplinary record a 

mitigating factor, it also found the following aggravating factors: a pattern 

of misconduct, multiple offenses, refusal to acknowledge the wrongful 

nature of his conduct, substantial experience in the practice of law, and 

indifference to making restitution. SCR 102.5. Based on these findings, 

the panel recommended that Sarb be disbarred from the practice of law in 

Nevada. 

A disciplinary panel's recommendation of disbarment is 

subject to automatic review by this court. SCR 105(3)(b). Although 

persuasive, the panel's findings and recommendations are not binding on 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A 
Gibbons 

Pickering Hardesty 

QAA 

Parraguirre 

Cherry 

Douglas 

Saitta 

3 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

J. 

this court. In re Discipline of Schaefer, 117 Nev. 496, 515, 25 P.3d 191, 

204 (2001). This court must review the record de novo and exercise its 

independent judgment with respect to what type of discipline, if any, is 

warranted. Id. The panel's findings of misconduct must be supported by 

clear and convincing evidence. Id. 

As Sarb failed to answer or otherwise respond to the State 

Bar's complaints, the charges are deemed admitted, SCR 105(2), and we 

conclude that clear and convincing evidence supports the panel's findings. 

Additionally, the State Bar's recommended discipline is appropriate in 

light of the nature of Sarb's misconduct and apparent abandonment of his 

law practice. 

Accordingly, we disbar Sarb from the practice of law in 

Nevada. Such disbarment is irrevocable. SCR 102(1). Sarb shall pay the 

costs of the disciplinary proceedings within 30 days of receipt of the 

Nevada State Bar's bill of costs. See SCR 120. 

It is so ORDERED. 

(01 1947A 
cc: Phillip J. Pattee, Assistant Bar Counsel 

Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada 

John H. Sarb 

Jeffrey Albregts, Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board 

Perry Thompson, U.S. Supreme Court Admissions Office 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 4 

(0) 194Th e