Receiver targets public comments in Uncle Nearest case

9:15 a.m. April 10, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

The court-appointed receiver in the Uncle Nearest case filed new exhibits on Thursday to back his sanctions push against founder Fawn Weaver, accusing her of violating court orders through social media posts, public remarks, and other public messaging.

In a separate filing, the receiver also gave the court a revised list of appraisers for a Martha’s Vineyard property after one proposed appraiser declined to participate and two others were no longer available.

• Expedited Motion for Sanctions
• Manual Filing of Video Exhibits
• Martha's Vineyard Appraisers

Sanctions Fight Centers on Public Messaging

At the heart of the April 9 filing is the receiver’s claim that Weaver used Instagram videos, conference remarks, and other public statements to fight the case in public despite prior court warnings against turning the litigation into a public-relations campaign. The receiver’s filing points to earlier court orders barring interference with the receiver and quotes the court’s January warning that it would not allow the case to be used to push a public narrative rather than resolving the dispute before it.

The receiver said Weaver’s public campaign began Feb. 5, before a key Feb. 9 hearing, and continued afterward through Instagram videos, conference remarks later posted to TikTok, and a press release issued alongside the later bankruptcy filings. The filing points to a Feb. 5 Instagram video, a three-part Feb. 12-13 Instagram series Weaver titled the “Heist of Uncle Nearest,” a March 17 Instagram video, two TikTok videos, and a press release tied to the bankruptcy-related actions.

According to the receiver, those materials were part of a sustained effort to fight the case in public rather than in court. The filing says Weaver used them to comment on the Feb. 9 hearing testimony, to accuse others of wrongdoing, and to push claims that the receivership had ended. The receiver argues that the result was “widespread confusion and distraction” for the receivership and the case.

Video Exhibits Filed Separately

A companion April 9 filing says seven video exhibits could not be uploaded electronically and instead had to be manually delivered to the clerk.

Those materials included the Feb. 5 Instagram video, the three Feb. 12-13 “Heist of Uncle Nearest” videos, the March 17 Instagram video, and two TikTok clips from the Baltimore conference.

The filings do not resolve the sanctions dispute, but add exhibits and detail to the receiver’s already-pending motion, leaving it to the court to decide whether prior orders were violated and whether sanctions are warranted.

Martha’s Vineyard Appraisal Track Reworked

In a separate April 8 filing, the receiver turned to another live issue in the case: finding an appraiser for real estate in Martha’s Vineyard. The filing says the receiver submitted additional information after a March 31 court order required more detail about available appraisers for the property.

According to that filing, Jennifer DaSilva of Compass Realtors in Edgartown, Massachusetts, told the receiver that the previously identified appraiser, Jeffrey Ciciora, did not want to participate because of the related lawsuit, while Harlan Gibbs and Shelly Medeiros had retired. That sent the receiver back to court with a revised list.

The receiver told the court that Bill Cleary, who had already been proposed earlier and was not opposed by the defendants, remains available and could complete an appraisal in about 21 to 28 days.

The filing also adds three more possible appraisers: Nick Fernandez of Network Realty Service, with an estimated turnaround of seven to 10 days; Tom Garrahan of Thomas Garrahan Appraisals of Cape Cod, with an estimated turnaround of about two weeks; and Neil Maloney of Hartel Realty, with an estimated turnaround of about 21 days.

That filing does not choose an appraiser or approve any sale. But it shows the Martha’s Vineyard property remains in play and that the court’s effort to line up an appraisal had to be reworked after proposed appraisers dropped out or became unavailable.

Two Tracks, No Ruling Yet

Taken together, the filings show the case moving on two tracks at once: the receiver’s push to punish what he says was a public campaign around the case, and the court’s continuing effort to value a Martha’s Vineyard property tied to the estate.

For now, neither dispute is settled. The filings add to the record, but the next decisions still rest with U.S. District Judge Charles E. Atchley Jr.