Uncle Nearest says time is hurting brand

Company says it is losing visitors, shelf space, customers as court weighs who had power to seek bankruptcy protection

2:51 p.m. May 8, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

Uncle Nearest says it is losing visitors, shelf space, customers, and brand value while it waits for a federal court to decide whether Fawn Weaver had the authority to put the whiskey company into bankruptcy.

In a Thursday filing in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, the company asked for an expedited appeal of a dismissed Chapter 11 case. Uncle Nearest argues the alleged harm is not theoretical. It is happening now.

A Chapter 11 case could give the company a court-supervised path to reorganize and pursue legal claims while under bankruptcy protection. For now, that path remains closed.

The bankruptcy case lasted two days.

Weaver filed the Chapter 11 petition on March 17 on behalf of Uncle Nearest. On March 19, the bankruptcy court dismissed it after finding that Weaver lacked authority to file because a federal receivership order had vested that power in court-appointed receiver Phillip G. Young Jr.

That is now the core fight on appeal: who had the power to take Uncle Nearest into bankruptcy?

Young and Farm Credit Mid-America have opposed expedited review. In Thursday’s reply, Uncle Nearest said the receiver and lender view the motion as lacking a new emergency and relying on issues already addressed by the bankruptcy court.

The bankruptcy court previously found that the receivership order left “no doubt” about who had authority to act for Uncle Nearest, including the authority to file a bankruptcy case.

Uncle Nearest is asking the district court to expedite the appeal beyond the ordinary schedule.

“The persistence of harm does not diminish urgency,” the company wrote. “It establishes urgency.”

Company Says the Damage is Happening Now

In a declaration attached to the filing, Weaver said she recently visited Nearest Green Distillery and found a business that looked far different from its pre-receivership operation.

Before the receivership, she said, weekends at the distillery were often at or near capacity, with about 25 tours frequently sold out. During her visit, she said, staff were trying to fill about 12 tours and could not do so. A visiting team from one of the company’s largest national accounts received a private tour, she said, not by design, but because “virtually no other guests were present.”

Weaver also said Humble Baron, the bar and hospitality venue at Nearest Green Distillery, was empty at a time when it would normally have been busy. According to her declaration, Uncle Nearest’s internal marketing team has historically attributed about 25% of the distillery's visitor traffic to Humble Baron as part of the broader guest experience.

The declaration says key distillery metrics have fallen since the receivership, including an approximately 32% decrease in combined revenue and a 41% decrease in tour attendance. Weaver said the distillery had welcomed more than 230,000 visitors annually before the receivership and was projected to exceed 250,000.

For now, those claims are part of Uncle Nearest’s argument for speed. They have not yet been tested in the appeal.

Shelf Space and Sales Are Part of the Argument

The alleged damage, according to the company, extends beyond the distillery gates.

Weaver’s declaration says the company has lost more than 2,000 distribution points from at least four national retail accounts since the receivership was imposed. Those placements, she said, took time and relationships to secure and are not easily recovered once competitors move into that space.

The company also pointed to Nielsen retail scan data, arguing the brand’s performance has sharply reversed compared with the broader American whiskey market.

According to the data filed with the court, Uncle Nearest outperformed the market by about 31.2% in January 2025. By January 2026, it was underperforming the market by about 18.3%. By March 2026, the underperformance was about 15.5%. The filing notes a 46.7-point reversal from January 2025, when the brand was well ahead of the market.

Uncle Nearest argues that Young and Farm Credit have not answered that data with competing figures. Instead, the company says, they have characterized the emergency motion as a repeat of arguments already made.

That is the split: Young and Farm Credit say the receivership order controls who can act for the company. Uncle Nearest says the bankruptcy court’s order goes too far by allowing a receivership to remove the company’s officers and board from the decision to seek bankruptcy protection.

The Authority Fight Still Controls Everything

The bankruptcy court sided with the receiver and Farm Credit in March.

In its dismissal order, the court pointed to language in the receivership order giving Young the powers of Uncle Nearest’s officers, directors, members, and managers. The court also cited language authorizing Young to file a bankruptcy proceeding on behalf of the company.

Uncle Nearest’s appeal challenges that conclusion.

The company argues this is not an abstract legal fight. The answer determines whether Uncle Nearest can pursue bankruptcy protection at all.

Court Must Decide Whether Appeal Should Move Faster

Uncle Nearest also argues that pending proceedings in the broader Farm Credit receivership case do not solve the problem.

“The existence of parallel proceedings does not prevent ongoing harm,” the company wrote. “It prolongs it.”

The company says the delay allows the alleged losses to keep piling up _ in distribution, tourism, market position, and enterprise value.

Young and Farm Credit have disputed the need for an expedited appeal. Uncle Nearest says they have not shown how a faster schedule would prejudice them, arguing that they have not claimed the issues are too factually complex, that the record is incomplete, or that they cannot respond on an accelerated timeline.

The district court now has to decide whether that claimed damage justifies moving the appeal to the front of the line – or whether Uncle Nearest must wait on the normal timetable.