COMPLAINT

Jerome Larkin, Administrator of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, by his attorney, Peter L. Rotskoff, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 753, complains of Respondent, Brian F. Lansu, who was licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois on November 4, 1999, and alleges that Respondent has engaged in the following conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or which brings the courts or the legal profession into disrepute:

1. Between October 2, 2006, and October 30, 2007, Respondent was employed as a salaried associate at The Gloor Law Group LLC, a law firm located in Chicago, Illinois. Respondent concentrated in medical malpractice defense work at The Gloor Law Group. At all times during Respondent's employment, the firm had a policy which reimbursed employees for legitimate business-related expenses, including travel expenses.

2. Between February 23, 2007, and October 11, 2007, Respondent prepared and submitted to The Gloor Law Group, at least 52 separate "Travel Expense Records" ("Expense Records") seeking reimbursement for purported business-related travel expenses as set forth below:

3. Between February 23, 2007 and October 30, 2007, Respondent sought reimbursement for funds he was not entitled to receive and The Gloor Law Group paid Respondent at least $5,574.99 to reimburse him for the purported travel expenses described in Paragraph 2, above.

4. Each of the fifty-two Expense Records described above, was false. At not time did Respondent travel to the locations stated on the Expense Record for the purpose stated on the Expense Record. In most instances, the subject of the meeting did not exist or the subject did not reside or have an office in the location stated on the Expense Record.

5. Respondent knew that each of the fifty-two Expense Records was false and he submitted them to The Gloor Law Group for the purpose of obtaining funds which he knew he was not entitled to receive.

6. On October 30, 2007, Respondent was terminated from The Gloor Law Group. He subsequently repaid the law firm for the travel reimbursement funds he had received, as described in Paragraph 3, above.

7. By reason of the conduct described above, Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct:

1. conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; and

2. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 770.

WHEREFORE, the Administrator requests that this matter be assigned to a panel of the Hearing Board, that a hearing be held, and that the panel make findings of fact, conclusions of fact and law, and a recommendation for such discipline as is warranted.