477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986). Summary judgment is proper if “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); LaPointe v. United Autoworkers Local 600, 8 F.3d 376, 378 (6th Cir.1993). Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of the judge. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, 106 S.Ct. 2505. In addition, when considering a summary judgment motion, the evidence of the non- movant is to be believed and all justifiable inferences ’n, 647 F.2d 651 (6th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). Although this might ordinarily end the
holding that ncaa was not an indirect recipient of federal funds even though it received dues from schools that received federal funds holding that kentucky high school athletic association was an indirect recipient of federal funds because it was created by state law its functions were determined by the kentucky board of education and it received dues from member schools who received federal funds holding that ohio high school athletic association was not a recipient of federal funds because it did not receive direct federal assistance and it did not receive money from local schools who were recipients of federal assistance holding that kentucky high school athletic associa tion qualified as agent of the state and as recipient of federal funds so as to be subject to title ix when association received dues from member schools which received federal funds holding that the conditional grant of federal funds to ohio for highway projects did not make the federal government liable for ohios acts or omissions