Motion to Terminate Receivership

Motion to Reconsider Receivership and Stay Access to Proprietary Information.

(Filed December 23, 2025)

  1. Founders Ask Court to Immediately Terminate Receivership and Return Control to the Board

    The Motion asks the Court to dissolve the receivership, return operational control to the Board, maintain a temporary stay to allow an orderly transition, and prevent further erosion of enterprise value while the case proceeds to judgment. It argues that continued court control is now causing measurable harm rather than preserving value.
  2. Founders Assert Receivership Has Created Confusion About Ownership — Undermining Consumer Trust and Brand Loyalty

    The Motion includes a sworn declaration detailing how the receivership has caused widespread confusion among consumers, distributors, and retailers about whether Uncle Nearest is being liquidated or sold. That confusion has directly weakened brand loyalty and damaged goodwill built over eight years.
  3. New Court Filing Says: Basis for Receivership Has Been “Debunked” — Company Is Solvent and Over-Secured

    The Motion states that the central premises used to justify the receivership no longer exist. The Receiver himself has concluded that Uncle Nearest is worth significantly more than all of its combined debts, that Farm Credit is fully secured, and that there is no insolvency risk.
  4. Motion Details How Farm Credit’s False Allegations — Including the Martha’s Vineyard Claim — Were Known to Be Untrue

    The Motion lays out documentary evidence and sworn testimony showing Farm Credit knew its allegations about the Martha’s Vineyard property were false, yet presented them anyway. These claims were later echoed in the press, causing reputational and financial harm. The Motion argues this demonstrates unclean hands, barring Farm Credit from equitable relief.
  5. Filing States Farm Credit’s Loans Are Subject to Major Offsets From Defenses and Counterclaims

    The Motion explains that Farm Credit’s asserted debt may be significantly reduced or eliminated once defenses and counterclaims are adjudicated, including claims arising from unauthorized loan draws, failure of lender oversight, and bad-faith conduct during refinancing negotiations.
  6. Motion Presents Objective Nielsen Data Showing Receivership Is Actively Destroying Enterprise Value

    Attached Nielsen retail sales data shows a sharp and immediate decline in sales beginning precisely when the receivership started, reversing a strong positive growth trajectory that existed before the Receiver took control. The Motion calls this decline “objectively measurable and accelerating.”
  7. Filing Says Receiver’s “Cash Preservation” Strategy Is Causing Market Share Loss and Brand Damage

    The Motion explains that delayed or denied marketing, production, and growth initiatives have caused loss of distributor confidence, shelf space, and national accounts — damage that cannot be fully restored through money damages alone.
  8. Filing Confirms: Receiver Found No Fraud by Founders or Current Management

    After months of investigation, the Receiver confirmed there is no evidence of misappropriation, theft, or financial impropriety by Fawn Weaver, Keith Weaver, or the current management team — undercutting any rationale for continued extraordinary court control.
  9. Motion Clarifies: The Issue Is Not With the Receiver Personally — But With the Continued Scope and Direction of the Receivership

    The Motion expressly states that the Founders do not challenge the Receiver’s integrity or diligence, and credit him with debunking Farm Credit’s insolvency and fraud narrative. The issue, the Motion explains, is that the receivership itself has outlived its purpose and is now being used to justify actions the Court never intended — including a pre-judgment sale and disclosure of proprietary information.
  10. Filing Argues Receivership Was Never Intended to Enable a Pre-Judgment Sale or Forced Restructuring

    The Motion cites the Court’s own language that a receivership is an “extraordinary remedy” meant only to protect collateral — not to liquidate assets or restructure ownership before trial. It argues the current trajectory exceeds the Court’s stated intent.
  11. Separate Request Seeks Immediate Halt to Sharing Proprietary Information With Competitors

    Pending a hearing, the Motion asks the Court to temporarily enjoin the Receiver and his professionals from sharing proprietary business information with third parties — warning that competitor access to pricing, strategy, and distributor data poses irreparable harm.

Read the full filing → Motion to Terminate Receivership