case of a single temporary total disability. Nor is it an ordinary case of a residual partial disability of a hand, in which the percentage of loss of use determines the percentage of benefits, as in Babineaux v. Great American Ins. Co., 1964, 245 La. 718, 160 So.2d 591. Babineaux notes a legislative intent “to liberalize the compensation act and extend coverage so as to include, as nearly as possible, recovery for every type of injury . . . . ” 160 So.2d at 593. Nevertheless, R.S. 23:1221(4) (p) does not provide for every case not earlier covered in § 1221, but only for those of disfigurement or serious permanent impairment of the usefulness of a physical function: subsec. (4) (p) “is not a catch-all clause,” Bergeron v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 1962, 243 La. 108, 141 So.2d 832 (<HOLDING>)- In Babineaux a distal phalanx of an index
holding that measures to enforce judgment are compensable holding that a  15 lien did not apply because that section does not require reimbursement for an injury not compensable under c 152 holding that employees stress injury solely due to disciplinary proceedings was not compensable under workers compensation holding that limitation of access is accomplished under states police power and is not compensable holding a miscarriage not compensable under subsec 4p