Judge won’t halt Uncle Nearest sale efforts

Uncle Nearest's receiver free to pursue a sale while Farm Credit agrees to reduce outstanding debt

3:11 p.m. Oct. 26, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

Fawn Weaver is still trying to get Uncle Nearest out of receivership. But a federal judge has refused to freeze a potential sale of the whiskey company while she appeals, leaving the man running it free to keep looking for a buyer.

The decision is the latest turn in a federal lawsuit involving a whiskey brand named for Nathan "Nearest" Green, whose place in Lynchburg's whiskey history reaches back generations.

In rulings issued Friday and Monday, U.S. District Judge Charles E. Atchley Jr. rejected Weaver's attempt to block a sale and approved the dismissal of a separate counterclaim against Farm Credit Mid-America, the lender whose lawsuit put Uncle Nearest under court control in August 2025.

The second ruling came Monday, Oct. 26, after Farm Credit agreed to reduce the company's outstanding obligations in exchange for dropping the claim.

Neither order means Uncle Nearest has been sold. In fact, the receiver has yet to secure a signed purchase agreement.

But Weaver's latest attempt to stop a potential sale has failed, and the financial problems driving the receiver's search for a buyer haven't gone away.

Weaver's appeal remains alive

Weaver had asked Atchley to prevent receiver Philip G. Young Jr., Farm Credit, or anyone else from selling, transferring, or otherwise disposing of substantially all the assets of Uncle Nearest Inc., Nearest Green Distillery Inc., and Uncle Nearest Real Estate Holdings LLC.

Her concern was what might happen before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decides whether the receivership should continue. If the company's assets are sold first, Weaver argued, even a successful appeal might not allow her to restore the business to its previous condition.

She warned that a sale could make it impossible "to restore the enterprise or the practical position that existed before the transaction."

Atchley wasn't persuaded. His 12-page ruling, filed Friday, Oct. 23, revisited the findings that led him to keep Young in charge earlier this year.

In a May 26 order, Atchley determined Uncle Nearest was insolvent and that Farm Credit's collateral remained at risk without court supervision. The judge also found that Uncle Nearest had previously engaged in fraudulent conduct and that less drastic measures would not adequately protect the lender's interests.

Atchley concluded at the time that the receiver had done more good than harm.

Weaver appealed that ruling, and on Oct. 2, the Sixth Circuit rejected Young's attempt to have her appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Weaver pointed to that decision as evidence that serious questions remained about whether the receivership should continue.

Atchley called her interpretation a "specious reading" of the appellate court's decision.

The Sixth Circuit had determined that it could hear Weaver's appeal. It had not decided whether she was likely to win. Atchley also found that Weaver had failed to identify meaningful changes since his May ruling that would justify stopping Young's work.

She pointed to allegations Young had made concerning Farm Credit's role in fraudulent conduct by former Uncle Nearest Chief Financial Officer Michael Senzaki.

Young had alleged that Farm Credit's negligence and gross negligence enabled Senzaki's conduct. Those were allegations against the lender, not findings that Farm Credit had committed wrongdoing.

Atchley said Weaver had not explained how those allegations changed the conditions that justified keeping Uncle Nearest under court supervision.

Still no deal to sell Uncle Nearest

Weaver faced another problem with her request. The receiver's own reports gave the judge little reason to believe a sale was about to happen.

Young has been exploring a sale of substantially all Uncle Nearest assets for more than a year.

His fourth quarterly report disclosed a letter of intent with a prospective buyer. But in his latest report, Young acknowledged that, despite the efforts of his team and consultants, "no buyer has yet signed an asset purchase agreement."

Atchley said there was no evidence that a sale was imminent.

There are also legal safeguards Weaver could use if Young eventually finds a buyer.

The receiver has discussed placing most of the companies under his control into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and seeking approval to sell their assets through that process.

Such a sale would require notice and a hearing, giving Weaver an opportunity to object.

Even if Young pursues a sale outside bankruptcy, Atchley's approval would still be required following a hearing.

Those requirements, the judge concluded, undercut Weaver's argument that she would suffer irreparable harm unless he intervened immediately.

Uncle Nearest continues to lose money

Weaver wants to keep the company intact while she appeals. Young says the longer that takes, the less there may be left to save.

His latest quarterly report describes a business struggling to keep its doors open.

Uncle Nearest remains "operating at a loss," according to the filing, and is maintaining operations through cash infusions from Farm Credit, significant expense reductions, and receivership fees coming in below budget.

Young doesn't expect conditions to improve anytime soon. "The reduction of worldwide demand for alcohol, the changing distributor network, and the impact of tariffs on international sales continue to depress sales," he wrote.

The court case hasn't helped business, either. Young reported that employees, vendors, and business partners have grown concerned about the company's long-term future. Those worries, he said, have hurt sales and could continue eroding the value of the Uncle Nearest brand.

Atchley found that preventing Young from pursuing a sale could make matters worse for creditors.

An injunction lasting through the appellate briefing schedule would require the receivership to keep spending money while potentially making Uncle Nearest less attractive to buyers.

And the longer the company operates at a loss, the greater the risk to those waiting to be paid.

Weaver argued that selling substantially all the company's assets could undermine her succession and stewardship plans for descendants of Nathan "Nearest" Green, whose name and legacy are central to the brand.

Atchley acknowledged that interest, along with the public's interest in preserving meaningful appellate review. But he also recognized the importance of allowing a receiver to manage a troubled company efficiently and protect the interests of creditors.

The judge found the competing public interests essentially balanced.

The other considerations weighed against Weaver. She had not demonstrated that she was likely to prevail on appeal or suffer irreparable harm, while the receiver and creditors could be hurt by an injunction.

Her request was denied.

Farm Credit agrees to reduce debt

Three days later, Atchley issued another order, this one involving a dispute between Young and Farm Credit.

The receiver had filed a counterclaim against the lender on Uncle Nearest's behalf.

Under an agreement submitted to the court, Farm Credit agreed to reduce the amount of its outstanding obligations in exchange for dismissal of that claim.

The Oct. 26 order does not disclose how much Farm Credit agreed to reduce the outstanding debt.

Atchley dismissed the counterclaim with prejudice, meaning it cannot be brought again. He also denied Farm Credit's pending motion to dismiss the claim because it was no longer necessary.

The agreement closes that portion of the litigation, but it does not dismiss Farm Credit's underlying lawsuit against Uncle Nearest, Weaver, and her husband, Keith Weaver.

That case began with allegations that the defendants breached a July 22, 2022, credit agreement and associated loan documents.

Farm Credit subsequently asked the court to appoint a receiver to oversee Uncle Nearest's business operations and protect its interests.

Young was appointed in August 2025.

The counterclaim's dismissal removes one dispute from an already complicated case, but the lender's original claims and the receivership remain.

The next move

Weaver's appeal of the May 26 receivership ruling is still pending before the Sixth Circuit. The current briefing schedule runs through Dec. 11. Friday's order doesn't decide that appeal, and Monday's ruling doesn't end the underlying lawsuit. More importantly, neither order authorizes Young to sell Uncle Nearest.

If the receiver secures a purchase agreement, the proposed transaction will still have to go before a court, where Weaver can challenge it.

For now, Young can continue negotiating with potential buyers while Weaver makes her case to the appeals court.

There is no signed deal before the judge. There is, however, a company still losing money and a receiver who believes waiting much longer could make it worth even less.