I thought of a couple of other things.......why would the ownership hearing be dependent on the embezzlement charge/trial? Determining who is the legal owner of the horse has nothing to do with the situation of him selling a leased (not purchased) horse, which I understand is the basis for the embezzlement charge.
I can (somewhat) understand the uncle thinking he is the legal owner, because he paid for the horse. However, I think he is out of luck as he purchased a stolen horse. No compensation for him.
Next question: Do both parties (you and the uncle) have to be in court when the decision is read? In other words, another hearing has to be scheduled, or do you just get a phone call (and I presume he does too) and then you can go get the horse?? I cannot think that any judge in his/her right mind will rule against you, so I know it's going to be the right decision.