An initial public offering of Gain Capital Holdings Inc. stock raised a total of $81 million in gross proceeds at a price that came in lower than the company expected.

The Bedminster, N.J., company, which is an online foreign exchange trading platform for retail customers, said Wednesday it priced an IPO of 9 million shares at $9 per share. The stock will start trading Wednesday under the ticker symbol "GCAP."

Gain Capital offered 407,692 shares and selling stockholders offered about 8.6 million. The company said it won't receive proceeds from the sale of shares by selling stockholders. Underwriters also have an option to buy more than 1.3 million additional shares to cover excess demand.

The company had said it expected to sell about 11 million shares at a price between $13 and $15. It plans to use the net proceeds to pay the expenses related to the IPO.

Gain Capital was founded in 1999 by a group of trading and technology professionals. It offers global over-the-counter foreign exchange trading where participants trade with one another rather than through a central exchange or clearinghouse. It offers access to global gold and silver markets, stock indices, and commodities.

Commercial real estate financier Walker & Dunlop Inc. said it has priced its initial public offering at $10 per share, well below the company's expected range.

The offering includes about 10 million shares, including 6.7 million being sold by Walker & Dunlop and another 3.3 million sold by initial shareholders. The company, which is based in Bethesda, Md., had expected to sell its initial shares between $14 and $16 apiece.

Walker & Dunlop has said in previous regulatory filings that it expects to net $89.5 million in proceeds from the offering. It won't receive proceeds from the sale of shares by shareholders. The company plans to use the proceeds to execute its growth strategy, fund working capital needs and for general corporate purposes.

The company has also said that it does not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

Walker & Dunlop was founded in 1937 and has grown into one of the biggest originators and sellers of commercial real estate loans, particularly in the apartment buildings segment.

In addition to originating loans for sale to investors or government mortgage finance companies, Walker & Dunlop also services apartment building mortgages and other commercial real estate financing products.

Last year, the company originated more than $2.2 billion in commercial real estate loans, the majority through programs by government-sponsored entities such as Fannie Mae or the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Real estate investment trust Lexington Realty Trust said Wednesday it is publicly offering $77 million in common stock.

The company is offering 10 million shares at $7.70 apiece, marking a 4.3 percent discount to the stock's closing price of $8.05 on Tuesday.

The company also granted the underwriter a 30-day option to buy up to an additional 1.5 million shares. Barclays Capital is the sole book running manager.

The offering is expected to close on Dec. 20. The company has about 134.7 million shares of common stock outstanding.

Lexington Realty said it would use proceeds to repay debt and for general corporate purposes.

Shares of Lexington Realty rose 6 cents to $8.11 in morning trading on Wednesday.

A Florida court has upheld a $28.3 million verdict against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in a lawsuit filed by the family of a deceased smoker.

The 1st District Court of Appeal's ruling Tuesday marked the first decision on an appeal in thousands of smoker lawsuits being tried across the state. The court sided with the family of Pensacola smoker Benny Martin, who died of lung cancer in 1995.

The appeals judges disagreed with the tobacco company's claims that damages were excessive.

About 8,000 similar lawsuits are being tried individually after the state Supreme Court in 2006 threw out a $145 billion class-action damage award for smokers. That decision also concluded that cigarette makers knowingly sold dangerous and defective products.

The Complaint names RINO and certain of the Company’s current and former executive officers and directors as defendants. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements, and/or omitted material facts. Specifically, throughout the Class Period, the Company represented that it was experiencing steady financial growth due, in large part, to the success of its Flue Gas Desulphurization equipment (“FGD”) sales. However, unbeknownst to the market, while RINO was reporting increasingly favorable financial results driven by its FGD business, certain of its reported contracts were, in fact, non-existent and, therefore, the Company’s publicly reported financial statements materially inaccurate.

The truth began to emerge on November 10, 2010 when Muddy Waters, LLC (“MW”) issued a research report about, and a “Strong Sell” recommendation for, the Company. In that report, MW states, among other things, that RINO had fabricated the existence of at least five of the nine customer contracts for FGD equipment reported in the Company’s public filings. Moreover, MW reported that filings with the People’s Republic of China’s State Administration of Industry and Commerce (“SAIC”) showed that the Company’s 2009 consolidated revenue was only $11.1 million, as opposed to the $192.6 million reported in the Company’s SEC filings.

The price of the Company’s stock fell approximately 28% on the publication of the MW report. On November 15, 2010, RINO announced disappointing third quarter 2010 financial results and the Company’s stock continued its precipitous decline. The next day, on November 16, 2010, the Company postponed a previously scheduled earnings conference call and its stock continued to drop. At midday on November 17, 2010, trading in RINO stock was suspended. It was subsequently reported that trading was suspended at the request of the Company based on advice of its counsel.

On November 19, 2010, RINO filed a Form 8-K with the SEC in which it acknowledged that certain of the allegations made by MW were accurate, and that the Company had, in fact, fabricated the existence of at least two contractual relationships.

The Company has since announced that investors should not rely on its annual financial reports for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, quarterly reports for the periods ended March 31, 2008 to September 30, 2009, and quarterly reports for the periods March 31, 2010 to September 30, 2010 inasmuch as they incorporate results from 2008 and 2009. The SEC has also begun a formal investigation into the Company’s financial reporting and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Furthermore, the NASDAQ delisted RINO’s stock on or about December 8, 2010.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than January 14, 2011. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact Timothy J. MacFall, Esquire or Noah R. Wortman, Case Development Director of Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., 919 North Market Street, Suite 980 Wilmington, Delaware, 19801 at (888) 969-4242, by e-mail to info@rigrodskylong.com, or via our website: http://www.rigrodskylong.com/news/RINOInternationalCorp-RINO.

In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class member’s claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Any member of the proposed class may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., with offices in Wilmington, Delaware and Garden City, New York, regularly litigates securities class, derivative and direct actions, shareholder rights litigation and corporate governance litigation, including claims for breach of fiduciary duty and proxy violations in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in state and federal courts throughout the United States.