Receiver won’t oppose Weaver’s bid to reclaim Grant Sidney

Five months into the Grant Sidney receivership, Phillip Young says he won't oppose returning control to Fawn Weaver

11:18 p.m. Oct. 28, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

The federal receiver overseeing Uncle Nearest isn't fighting Fawn Weaver's effort to take back control of Grant Sidney Inc.

In a two-page filing Wednesday, Oct. 28, receiver Phillip G. Young Jr. told U.S. District Judge Charles E. Atchley Jr. that he does not oppose Weaver's motion to remove Grant Sidney from receivership. Young pointed to his own September report, which concluded that Grant Sidney was unlikely to hold significant assets that could benefit the Uncle Nearest receivership.

The decision now rests with Atchley. Young, however, won't stand in Weaver's way.

Weaver filed her motion Oct. 14, seeking to restore Grant Sidney's authority to manage its own affairs and direct its legal representation. Alternatively, she asked Atchley to suspend the receivership order as it applies to Grant Sidney while her appeal proceeds.

Receiver stands by September findings

Atchley brought Grant Sidney under Young's control May 26, directing the receiver to investigate whether the company held assets belonging to Uncle Nearest or other businesses already under receivership.

By September, Young was questioning whether Grant Sidney needed to remain under court supervision.

"Following additional review of information and documents related to Grant Sidney, the Receiver believes that it is unlikely that significant or substantial assets exist that could provide a recovery or benefit to the Uncle Nearest Receivership estate," Young wrote in his Sept. 23 report.

He stopped short of saying Grant Sidney had no assets. His assessment was that whatever assets existed were unlikely to provide a meaningful benefit to the receivership. Young also said he did not believe a permanent receivership over Grant Sidney was necessary.

Wednesday's response offered no new financial findings. Instead, Young reaffirmed his September conclusions and formally declined to oppose Weaver's request.

"The Receiver states that the Second Grant Sidney Report remains an accurate report and statement of the receivership of Grant Sidney, and as such, does not oppose the relief sought in the Grant Sidney Motion."

Grant Sidney has a financial stake

Grant Sidney isn't simply another company caught up in the Uncle Nearest lawsuit. Weaver identifies herself as its chief executive and sole shareholder. Her Oct. 14 motion describes the holding and investment company as Uncle Nearest's largest shareholder and, citing an earlier sworn filing by the receiver, says the whiskey company owes Grant Sidney approximately $3.69 million.

Those interests have become increasingly important as Young pursues a potential sale of Uncle Nearest's assets.

Weaver argues that Grant Sidney needs independent leadership and legal representation to protect its interests as both a shareholder and creditor. With Young overseeing both businesses, she maintains that Grant Sidney cannot independently evaluate or challenge decisions involving the company in which it holds an ownership stake.

Her motion also addresses unfinished investigative work involving historical QuickBooks records sought from Intuit. Young identified those records as outstanding in September, but Weaver argues that he can continue reviewing them without retaining control of Grant Sidney.

Wednesday's response does not resolve the records issue.

The larger fight continues

While Weaver presses to reclaim Grant Sidney, her fight over Uncle Nearest remains unresolved. On Friday, Oct. 23, Atchley rejected her attempt to temporarily block a potential sale of the whiskey company's principal assets while her appeal proceeds.

The judge found that Weaver had not demonstrated a sufficient likelihood of success on appeal or shown the irreparable harm necessary to justify an injunction. His ruling allows Young to continue pursuing potential buyers, although any sale would still require court approval.

She is not asking Atchley to dissolve the entire Uncle Nearest receivership through this motion. Instead, she wants Grant Sidney released from Young's supervision so it can independently manage its corporate affairs and protect its financial interests.

Even if Atchley grants the request, Young would remain in control of Uncle Nearest, and the broader litigation would continue. Releasing Grant Sidney would not prevent the receiver from pursuing a sale of the whiskey company's assets.

Atchley has not ruled on the Grant Sidney motion, and Wednesday's filing offers no indication of when he might act.

Five months after Grant Sidney was placed under federal receivership, the man appointed to oversee it has told the court he won't oppose returning control of the company to Weaver.