Summary

Yosef Karo Shulchan Aruch — Choshen Mishpat 27

If one deserves a nidui because he treated the court with disrespect, but the court wants to waive their honor and not put a nidui on him, they may do so, so long as it will not cause a loss in the honor of Hashem, such as a case where the people would treat the honor of Torah and judges lightly, in which case we would need to punish as is appropriate since the people were lax in this matter.
Source: Wikisource

Yosef Karo Shulchan Aruch — Choshen Mishpat 27

If there was no warning, he did not use a name or surname of God or the curse was via inference, such as where he said so-and-so should not be blessed by God, he will not receive lashes. (In the same vein, one who curses a deceased person is exempt.) It is still prohibited, however. If he degrades a scholar, we put a nidui on him. If the court wants to give him mardus lashes, they can whip him and punish him as much as they see fit. If he degraded an ignoramus, we punish him as much as the circumstances require.
Source: Wikisource

Yosef Karo Shulchan Aruch — Choshen Mishpat 27

If a man cursed himself or his fellow by any of them, he transgresses a negative precept.’ Gemara ibid. 36a: ‘R. Jannai said: This is the view of both (i.e., R. Meir and the Sages both agree that one who curses himself or his neighbour not merely by the Name, but even by any of the substitutes, transgresses a negative precept) .’↑ San. 60a whence it is derived that substitutes for the Divine Name employed by heathens are considered valid substitutes. Cf. also Ned. 3a, 10a where substitutes regarding vows are considered the foreign equivalents of the Hebrew.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature