Uncle Nearest receiver seeks to seal key report
7:13 p.m. Jan. 6, 2026
DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor
The court-appointed receiver for Uncle Nearest Inc. has asked a federal judge to keep his second quarterly report confidential. He says making the report public could hurt efforts to refinance debt or sell company assets at what he calls a “critical juncture” in the receivership.
On Tuesday, Jan. 6, Receiver Phillip G. Young Jr. filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, asking to submit the report under seal. He is concerned that sharing sensitive financial and strategic information could hurt talks with potential buyers or lenders and lower the company’s value. The case, brought by Farm Credit Mid-America, has put Uncle Nearest and related companies under federal receivership while the court reviews their finances and future.
The filing says Young believes sealing the report will not affect due process, since the court and all parties involved will still have full access. He argues that quarterly reports are meant to inform the court and litigants, not competitors, investors, or the public. He warns that sharing too much could “chill” refinancing talks or efforts to sell assets.
The motion also mentions that future lawsuits could arise from the receivership. It says sharing investigative findings or possible claims too soon could hurt the company’s value. Young says he must look into all possible legal actions for the company, but believes making details public now could be more harmful than helpful.
Judge: Clearer, Stricter Deadlines
The request to seal the report was made on the same day the court issued a separate order about missed reporting deadlines. Judge Charles E. Atchley Jr. said the receiver was not to blame for the late second quarterly report, but stressed the need for clearer, stricter deadlines. The court set firm deadlines for future reports and told the receiver to explain why a required 30-day status report was not filed.
Judge Atchley ordered the receiver to file a status report by Jan. 13, stating when the second quarterly report would be ready. He also told the receiver to explain by Jan. 20 why he did not follow a previous order that required monthly updates on compliance with a schedule set in October.
At the same time, a group of related companies and foundations known as the “Additional Entities” is exerting legal pressure. In a separate notice filed Jan. 6, they told the court the receiver did not follow up after requesting documents regarding a motion to clarify the receivership’s scope. They say the receiver did not provide additional evidence or respond to the court’s questions by the court’s deadlines.
Because of this, the Additional Entities want the court to officially say they are not part of the receivership and that their assets are not included. They claim the unresolved motion has caused a “severe financial impact” by creating uncertainty for their operations and business relationships. They have submitted a proposed order that would settle the issue in their favor.
Key Turning Point at Hand
All these filings show that the Uncle Nearest receivership has reached a key turning point. The receiver says keeping information private is important for protecting value and handling tough negotiations. Meanwhile, the court is watching compliance more closely, and related groups are pushing for answers and resolution.
The judge’s decision on sealing the second quarterly report, and how the receiver answers the court’s show-cause order, could affect the next stage of the case. This includes the future ownership, structure, and possible sale of one of Tennessee’s most closely watched spirits companies.
Federal judge affirms receiver’s control
Two decisive orders in the Uncle Nearest lawsuit – including striking filings by company directors – set the stage for the long-running dispute to move forward.
Weavers push back against receiver’s filing
Uncle Nearest’s majority directors are challenging a move by the court-appointed receiver, escalating the high-stakes lawsuit with Farm Credit Mid-America.
Receiver moves to strike Weavers’ filing
Court filing in the federal case involving Uncle Nearest Inc. claims Fawn and Keith Weaver violated a judge’s order – and the receiver wants it thrown out.
Weavers claim receiver overstepped authority
Uncle Nearest’s co-founders ask federal judge to scale back court-appointed receiver’s control, arguing it goes beyond the intent of protecting Farm Credit’s collateral.
Farm Credit pushes back on ‘emergency’ motion
Farm Credit disputes claims of an urgent filing in the Uncle Nearest case, saying no emergency exists and deadlines should be handled through the receiver.
Weavers’ legal action challenged by receiver
Phillip G. Young Jr. filed a sharply worded response opposing Uncle Nearest founders’ emergency motion, outlining why new lawsuits could be “fatal” to the brand.
