a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself. Id. at 165, 105 S.Ct. 3099. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has instructed that courts should assume that an action brought against an individual is brought against that individual solely in that individual’s official capacity when a complaint is silent on the issue. Egerdahl v. Hibbing Community College, 72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir.1995) (“[A] plaintiff who wishes to sue a state official in his personal capacity must so specify in her complaint. .. If a plaintiffs complaint is silent about the capacity in which she is suing the defendant, we interpret the complaint as including only official-capacity claims.”); Nix v. Norman, 879 F.2d 429, 431 (8th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>); accord Wells v. Brown, 891 F.2d 591, 592 (6th
holding that nature of alleged bias must be personal and not arising out of litigation holding that individualcapacity suits must be clear enough to notify defendant of the personal nature of the suit holding that a finding of fraud may be reversed only for clear error but that the finding must be judged in view of the clear and convincing burden of proof holding that the waiver of sovereign immunity must be clear and unequivocal holding that the person claiming the privilege must set forth with enough particularity to enable the court to make an informed decision the nature of the material withheld and of the threat to the national security should it be revealed