Collins Wins a Round in Steamy Courtroom Serial

Score one for Joan Collins.

The sultry star of television’s steamy “Dynasty” series won the first round Friday in a bitter court battle with her estranged husband, Peter Holm, when a Los Angeles judge upheld a premarital pact limiting the former Swedish pop star to 20% of the actress’ earnings during their 13-month union.

A jubilant Collins tearfully embraced divorce lawyer Marvin Mitchelson when the ruling was announced, threw off her dark glasses, raised her hand in a victory salute, then breathlessly vowed: “Freedom from all entanglements forever!”

Announcing that she was late for filming a lingerie commercial, Collins still took a few moments to preen before the mass of paparazzi who had dogged her every move since the Superior Court trial over the validity of the premarital agreement began last Tuesday.

The actress, who had discarded her bright yellow jacket of the day before for a more somber black and white ensemble, said she wished her estranged husband well.

“He’s a stubborn man,” Collins added, with a coolness befitting the venomous Alexis she portrays on the hit ABC prime-time soap. Holm, 14 years younger than the 54-year-old Collins, had argued that the agreement, signed three weeks before the pair wed in November, 1985, only covered how he would be supported during the brief marriage and had nothing to do with possible divorce proceedings.

Collins earned more than $5 million last year. And of that, more than $1 million went to the singer. Holm testified that the money was needed to embellish his designer wardrobe, to buy “petrol” for his Sterling and BMW automobiles, for lavish, costly gifts on his bride and to live in the comfortable style he had enjoyed with the actress.

He claimed that he still is entitled to the property and income that any husband would be due under California’s community property laws, but pledged throughout the trial that he still loves the television star and would prefer a reconciliation.

In ruling for Collins, Judge Earl F. Riley said he found Holm’s words “suspect,” when he testified that he would never take advantage of the actress as her previous three husbands had.

Uncharacteristically subdued after Friday’s ruling, Holm said the case “is not in any way over. It’s just started.”

He blamed the ruling, in part, on Thursday’s surprise witness, a 23-year-old would-be actress who collapsed on the witness stand after stunning the courtroom by detailing a torrid love affair with Holm before, during and after his marriage to Collins.

Testifying that Holm dubbed her his “passion flower,” dark-haired, shapely Romina Danielson said Holm persuaded her to marry an 80-year-old millionaire during their affair, because “it’s obvious he likes women with money.”

Seeks Security

She said the pop singer explained away his relationship with Collins as a way of making himself financially secure.

Collapsing suddenly after testifying that Holm had asked her to bear his child, Danielson was taken away on a stretcher by paramedics before the singer’s attorney could cross-examine her.

Because Danielson was said to be too shaken to resume on Friday, her testimony was ordered by Riley to be erased from the court record.

Nonetheless, Holm charged Friday, “it still leaves a stigma” in Riley’s mind. “We haven’t even had a chance to counter-argue it,” he lamented, before turning to sign an autograph for one of the spectators.

In another bizarre twist, Danielson contacted The Times on Friday afternoon to say that earlier in the week Holm had threatened her if she took the stand.

Danielson charged that Holm told her: “You better not come to court. . . . You say one thing and I’ll destroy you.”

Danielson said she fainted on Thursday after “Peter looked at me like, ‘Remember what I told you.’ And I died right there in my heart.”

Danielson said she intended to complete her testimony Friday, but failed to reach the courthouse in time. After returning home Friday afternoon, she said, “I saw this man . . . in the bushes near the house. . . .. He said to me: ‘Stop. You made him lose everything. Now remember . . . you’re next. You’re going to lose everything. You’re going to lose your life.’ ”

Danielson said she ran into the house and yelled for her bodyguard.

Contacted Friday evening, Holm’s attorney, Frank Steinschriber, said Riley’s decision had nothing to do with Danielson’s testimony and denied that the ruling was a significant setback for Holm.

“I was with Peter until 2 p.m. today (Friday), her name never came up. He has nothing to do with this woman, why would he threaten her? I’ve known Peter for seven or eight months, he doesn’t threaten anybody.”

As it had been throughout the three days of courtroom drama, admission to the proceedings was at a premium on Friday.

Spectators Queue Up

Old ladies and men, eager for a glimpse of the celebrities, joined reporters from British tabloids, the Swedish and French press, and from American magazines and newspapers to queue up more than two hours before the courtroom opened to grab a seat.

Afraid of losing their spots to the dozens who were left outside, virtually no one left as Mitchelson and Steinschriber made their last-minute pitches to Riley.

“In their life together, he’s gotten the maximum anybody could get,” the flamboyant Mitchelson argued. “All he had to do was keep the books, drive nice cars, wear $1,300 suits and $500 silk shirts. Pardon my pun--that’s the life of Riley.”

Countered Steinschriber: “The bottom line here, no matter how much money is involved, no matter how famous these people are . . . is whether or not you can uphold this as a termination, a cessation of marital rights.”

After the ruling, Steinschriber said he may appeal. But even if he chooses not to contest Riley’s decision, the trials and tribulations of Joan Collins and Peter Holm are far from over.

The next installment is due Aug. 18, when the pair are due back in court to bicker over Holm’s request for $80,000 in temporary spousal support.