credibility determinations, the weighing of evidence, and the drawing of inferences from the facts are the function of the jury, and therefore the evidence of the nonmovant is to be believed and all justifiable inferences are to be drawn in his favor. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, 106 S.Ct. at 2513. The nonmovant need not be given the benefit of every inference but only of every reasonable inference. Brown v. City of Clewiston, 848 F.2d 1534, 1540 n. 12 (11th Cir.1988). IV. Discussion The defendant argues that summary judgment is appropriate because the parties entered into a valid settlement agreement which constitutes a final resolution of the plaintiff’s discrimination claims. See United States Fire Insurance Co. v. Caulkins Indiantown Citrus Co., 931 F.2d 744, 748 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The Eleventh Circuit has held that a
holding that the repeal of a statute renders moot the question of its constitutionality and that the constitutionality of the new act does not arise on this appeal and    will be decided if and when it is presented holding appeal moot on this basis holding that the lack of any ongoing appeal of weeks conviction renders moot the question of bail pending direct appeal holding that the plaintiffs claim was moot because the construction project which was the subject of the dispute had been completed holding that the settlement of a dispute generally renders a case moot