Intentional torts like assault and outrage (a.k.a. infliction of emotional distress), or for that matter, dignitary torts (e.g., invasion of privacy, or alienation of affection) don't have readily measurable damages. (Except perhaps what a defendant can contrive as the costs of therapy and medication to address the psychological damage inflicted.)
Are there any broad conventions or theories on how damages should be assessed for such torts? Do precedents weigh heavily, or do damages awarded always come down to what a jury can be convinced is appropriate? Or, if brought in small-claims court (as would be more likely except for the most wealthy or sympathetic plaintiffs), do any jurisdictions have guidelines or precedents that apply?
(How are emotional distress damages quantified? turned up a report on how that particular tort was been compensated in various contexts. I'm interested in whether there is any broad custom or case law that applies across jurisdictions, or if any jurisdiction has more clear guidelines for assessing damages.)