IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

Industrial Commission Division

PRESIDING JUSTICE McCULLOUGH delivered the opinion of thecourt:

Claimant Linda J. Jaskoviak appeals from an order of thecircuit court of Will County confirming a decision of the IllinoisIndustrial Commission (Commission). The arbitrator deniedbenefits, finding that no employment relationship existed betweenclaimant and respondent, Will County Jury Commission. TheCommission affirmed and adopted the arbitrator's decision. Theissue on review is whether a person serving jury duty is anemployee of the jury commission. We affirm.

The facts are undisputed. Claimant received a jurysummons and reported to respondent as directed. She later receiveda $7 check from respondent. On her questionnaire, claimantindicated her occupation was teacher and identified the schooldistrict for which she worked. On June 13, 1994, while beingescorted with a group of jurors to a jury holding area, claimantlost her footing on a stairway and was injured.

Generally, the question of whether an employmentrelationship exists at the time of the accidental injury is aquestion of fact for the Commission, and the Commission's findingwill not be disturbed unless it is against the manifest weight ofthe evidence. Ware v. Industrial Comm'n,318 Ill. App. 3d 1117,1122, 743 N.E.2d 579, 583 (2000). However, because the relevantfacts are not in dispute and divergent inferences could not bedrawn from the undisputed facts, our consideration is de novo. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago v.Industrial Comm'n, 272 Ill. App. 732, 734, 650 N.E.2d 671, 673(1995). Moreover, where statutory construction is involved, ourconsideration is de novo. Sylvester v. Industrial Comm'n, 197 Ill.2d 225, 232, 756 N.E.2d 822, 827 (2001).

The Constitution of the State of Illinois creates a rightto trial by jury. Ill. Const. 1970, art. I,