Receiver accuses Weaver of defying court warnings

Court filing: Uncle Nearest CEO violated warnings against trying the dispute in public while related entities’ responses support broader receivership control

5:17 p.m. March 5, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

The court-appointed receiver in the Uncle Nearest case told a federal judge Thursday that founder Fawn Weaver has publicly discussed the litigation in defiance of court warnings and argued that newly filed responses from related companies bolster his bid to expand the receivership.

In one March 5 filing, Receiver Phillip G. Young Jr. asked the court to reject a motion by Fawn Weaver, Keith Weaver, and Grant Sidney, Inc. to reconsider the order placing Uncle Nearest, Inc. into receivership and to restrict access to proprietary information. He argued that the movants offered “nothing new of substance” and were trying to present to the court materials that could not be properly introduced at the Feb. 9 hearing under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Young also alleged that Weaver spent the past week publicly discussing the case on Instagram, through a “Follow the Case” link on her website, and during a CIAA conference appearance in Baltimore, despite the court’s warning against using the proceedings as a public-relations campaign.

In the same filing, the receiver said Weaver posted portions of hearing transcripts and her own pleadings on her website, but not filings from the receiver or the lender, which he characterized as an attempt to try the matter in the court of public opinion. He quoted the court’s earlier warning that the proceedings were not to be used as a public-relations campaign and noted that sanctions could follow if the court finds a party is using the case for an improper purpose rather than to resolve the underlying dispute.

He also alleged that Weaver, during her remarks in Baltimore, discussed hearing testimony and said she had intentionally violated a nondisclosure agreement regarding cash-flow projections. The receiver told the court he could provide video recordings if requested. No ruling on those allegations appears in the attached filings.

In a separate March 5 filing, Young argued that responses from affiliated companies reinforced his claim that Uncle Nearest and related entities operated with blurred corporate boundaries, shared resources and shifting funds. He wrote that the filings showed corporate formalities were not followed and that money was moved around the enterprise “as needs dictated.”

Young pointed to filings indicating that Shelbyville Grand allowed Nearest Green Distillery to fall 20 months behind on rent before a $130,000 catch-up payment was made while the case was pending; that Quill & Cask transferred more than $800,000 to Uncle Nearest Inc. in December 2024 and January 2025 in what it called equity investments; that Humble Baron paid no rent to Uncle Nearest Inc. while also acknowledging that Uncle Nearest financed much of its promotions; and that Grant Sidney allowed its bank accounts to be used in ways the receiver says avoided Uncle Nearest tax liabilities and the reach of creditors.

The related entities named in that filing were 4 Front Street LLC; Shelbyville Grand LLC; Shelbyville Barrel House BBQ LLC; Quill & Cask Owner LLC; Nashwood Inc.; Humble Baron Inc.; and Grant Sidney Inc. Young argued that even their responses support bringing them into the receivership action.

The filings do not include a new ruling from U.S. District Judge Charles E. Atchley Jr. However, they sharpen the issues now before the court: whether the existing receivership should remain in place, whether related entities should come under broader court control, and whether Weaver’s public comments crossed a line the court had already warned the parties not to approach.