Here's the latest in the James Brown estate saga. Earlier this month, Velma Warren Brown, the Godfather of Soul's first wife, claimed she was never divorced from him.

If that were true, all of his subsequent marriages would be nullified. According to the Associated Press and Augusta Chronicle, a 1969 divorce decree was discovered in court records, and she was the one who filed for divorce.

Even more mysterious is the mention in the handwritten 1969 divorce settlement of another child, Lisa Brown, who was five when the couple divorced in 1969. Brown, in his August 1, 2000 will, acknowledges six children, three from the first marriage and three out-of-wedlock children. No mention was made of Lisa.

Another snag in the estate battle is Brown's 2001 marriage to Tomi Rae Hynie and the couple's minor child, James Jr., aged seven. The adult Brown children maintain that this wasn't a legal marriage because Tomi Rae was still married to her first husband. In 2004 she got an annulment but didn't go through a second wedding ceremony with Brown.

The adult Brown children are attempting to upset the will which awarded them only the personal effects of the estate such as furniture, antiques, cars, boats and jewelry. After providing a trust for educating his grandchildren, James gave the bulk of his estate to a trust for the education of needy of South Carolina and Georgia.

The court has a challenging task to sort out the legal standing of those seeking a piece of the pie. I don't believe Velma can succeed in her claim. We know little about Lisa Brown but DNA could establish if she and James Brown Jr. are legal heirs not mentioned in the will.

It's estimated that five million unmarried couples are living together in the US. Over 30 percent of singles ages 18-29 are in this group.

For the first time in history, the majority of American households are headed by unmarried or single adults, according to census reports. In Canada, for most purposes, cohabiting partners of the same or opposite sex are treated as married. It's not the same here.

Without a cohabitation agreement, unmarried romantic partners will be treated as "legal strangers" in the event of breakup or death. They don't get the rights and protections of law that married couples enjoy.

An agreement defining your relationship will protect both parties and prevent palimony suits and ensure a fair distribution of property. Cohabitation agreements should cover the following:

1. Distribution of property in case of death.

2. Financial support during the relationship and after a split.

3. How the debts of the relationship will be paid.

4. Real estate purchases should be in both names with rights of survivorship.

5. Support and visitation of any children born.

6. Proxy for emergency medical decisions for each.

Some practical tips for merging two lives:

1. Keep separate bank and checking accounts. But open a joint account to be used only for household expenses.

2. Decide what percentage each will contribute to living expenses.

3. Create a budget and decide who will manage bill payments.

The contract should state that it "contemplates and compensates" for all services provided by either party. "Sexual services" are not consideration for the agreement. Division of property will be based upon the percentage each contributed to the partnership.

In a study by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) in 2004 of people aged 40-79, it was found that 66 percent of the women instigated divorce actions. Some said they could no longer endure drug or alcohol addiction. Others divorced because of physical and emotional abuse or for infidelity.

Researchers claim retirement is a strain on marriage, just as the empty nest may start the process of thinking about divorce. In Japan, women called retired husbands a nuisance. Some women can't stand their spouse home all day. In the U.K., gray divorce is becoming an epidemic. In Italy, married couples 55 and over seeking legal separation rose by three and a half percent, and those filing for divorce grew by three percent from 2000-2004.

U.S. census figures reveal divorce rates for those over 65 have doubled since 1980. Divorces in this age bracket grew to eight percent of all divorces in 2004. Older couples experiencing problems are less likely to seek professional counseling because they often consider it a stigma. Women from traditional backgrounds are rebelling late in marriages which subsume or suppress their individuality. They are often disappointed that an equal union, which is expected to provide personal fulfillment, has not been a reality.

It appears that older people are learning from younger generations that it's better to be happy and alone than miserable and married. While they are looking forward to a longer and healthier life, they may be seeking new partners or entering into new marriages. But if they do not find a new partner, who will they rely on if they become ill or incapacitated?

I'm wondering if any female readers, while going through the divorce process, thought the judge was biased against her. I've heard of a few cases where women had the perception the divorce judge favored the husband.

In Hong Kong, an appeals court banned a judge from hearing a divorce action because they seriously believed that the Justice would be biased against the wife. This controversy arose from a divorce battle which started in 2005.

Recently, the husband's attorney, writing to the judge, alleged that the wife would have his client killed if he returned to Hong Kong from a London trip. This was reported in the South China Morning Post.

Justice John Saunders said, "I do not consider that the father's fear of physical injury, is either irrational or a sign of instability." Apparently both the husband, his attorney and the judge took this alleged threat seriously.

Unfortunately this judge put his foot in his mouth when he expressed a biased conventional opinion, that the husband's fear may be "described as being akin to a fear, for personal safety, held by someone married to a person of Italian extraction."

To me this expression was shockingly outlandish and inappropriate for someone who should be fair to both sides. Why would a judge in Hong Kong refer to this Italian stereotype? Maybe he fell under the influence of "The Sopranos."

With courts dominated by male judges, no wonder some women feel they are ripped off in divorce settlements due to male prejudice. I don't think this is necessarily true, but often perception of those going through the system, becomes reality.

I choose not to believe all male judges have a female bias, but what is your experience?

Click here to read more.