Sidebars: Rushville restaurant offers variety of dining options, treats

Jennifer Lukemeyer , Fred Vaiana
July 18, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

SidebarsI grew up in Zionsville we’ll say “a while back” and the main, well really only, hangout was the Dairy Queen (conveniently located next to the Rolls Royce dealership – maybe foreshadowing Zionsville’s future???). Our DQ did not feel like a franchise because you knew everyone who was hanging out there and who worked there. It seemed more like a local place – kind of like Stagg’s Dairy Treats & Restaurant in Rushville – which is family-owned and has been since 1960. The indoor and outdoor décor mirrors a DQ (hence the prior references). The wall photos and awards reveal the restaurant’s community connections and reflect the employees’ dedication to Stagg’s, each other and the community. It is a true hometown treat in itself.

My partner Jeff Baldwin and I stopped by Stagg’s for a late lunch after a hearing in Rush County. It was a nice break from Jeff’s beloved sports radio, which apparently is the only station he subscribes to. Next time, I’m driving, and it will be Oprah radio for three straight hours. Aaaannywhoo, Jeff dug into a traditional cheeseburger – freshly made – and a side of fries. He was all but giddy to find they were crinkle fries! Any meal is more special when accompanied by a chocolate shake – handmade to boot! I kept it traditional, too, with a Coney dog with cheese and onion rings. There was nothing particularly special about either, other than I indulged in such selections and probably have not had such a combo since my DQ days back in Zionsville. Both meals hit the spot, not necessarily out of the park, but provided fun and frivolous calories. What I respected most was that nowhere on the menu could you find “jumbo” or “supersize” or “meal deal,” and that made a fast-food-like experience, less fast-food like.

I will admit, the menu offers quite a variety of options. You could get a wrap, sub or salad with your specification of toppings. It does seem more the setting for traditional fare like the various burgers (such as a pizza burger, salsa burger or mushroom-Swiss burger), dogs (Coney, foot-long, or corndog), or sandwiches (grilled cheese, tenderloins or sloppy Joe). Chicken selections comprise wings, strips or a chicken salad sandwich. Beyond the crinkle fries and onion rings, can you think of a better caloric splurge than “sloppy cheese tater tots?” I can’t. Oh, and they have other sides such as slaw, pepper cheese shotz and applesauce.

If your appetite demands, Stagg’s serves up Manhattans (roast beef and turkey), Swiss steak with mashed potatoes and gravy, and chicken and noodles with mashed potatoes and gravy. Most impressive is the price point – a cheeseburger with fries and my Coney dog and onion rings will cost ya only about 8 bucks. The most expensive items I could find were the Manhattans ringing in at $5.75.

However, what you should stop at Stagg’s for is the dairy treat. Indulge yourself with a parfait, banana split or strawberry shortcake for dessert. The selection goes on to include slushies, floats or freezes. The menu has a “novelty” section that teases with the likes of cherry or butterscotch ice cream bars, toffee bars, fudge bars, Popsicles, Choco Tacos, or old-fashioned orange push-ups. Again, you can stick to the traditional sundaes and pick out a variety of toppings – another special touch of a family-run and familiar place.

You cannot miss Stagg’s Dairy Treats & Restaurant right along SR 52 (3rd Street by then) as you come into town and only about a mile or so out from the courthouse. I give it three gavels, mainly for sprinkling hometown pride coupled with family values on top of this otherwise fast-food joint.•


Fred Vaiana and Jennifer M. Lukemeyer practice at Voyles Zahn & Paul in Indianapolis, focusing in criminal defense. Vaiana is a 1992 graduate of the John Marshall Law School in Chicago. Lukemeyer earned her J.D. from Southern Methodist University in 1994 and is active in the Indianapolis Bar Association, Indianapolis Inn of Courts and the Teen Court Program. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the authors.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  2. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  3. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  4. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?

  5. Research by William J Federer Chief Justice John Marshall commented May 9, 1833, on the pamphlet The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States written by Rev. Jasper Adams, President of the College of Charleston, South Carolina (The Papers of John Marshall, ed. Charles Hobson, Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 2006, p, 278): "Reverend Sir, I am much indebted to you for the copy of your valuable sermon on the relation of Christianity to civil government preached before the convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Charleston, on the 13th of February last. I have read it with great attention and advantage. The documents annexed to the sermon certainly go far in sustaining the proposition which it is your purpose to establish. One great object of the colonial charters was avowedly the propagation of the Christian faith. Means have been employed to accomplish this object, and those means have been used by government..." John Marshall continued: "No person, I believe, questions the importance of religion to the happiness of man even during his existence in this world. It has at all times employed his most serious meditation, and had a decided influence on his conduct. The American population is entirely Christian, and with us, Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange, indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it. Legislation on the subject is admitted to require great delicacy, because freedom of conscience and respect for our religion both claim our most serious regard. You have allowed their full influence to both. With very great respect, I am Sir, your Obedt., J. Marshall."