Chuck and Gena Norris
Honoring the late Chuck Norris—a man whose greatest fight was often for those he loved, like his 2017 battle for medical justice. Rumour Juice YOUTUBE SCREENSHOT

Chuck Norris' death on 20 March 2026 has resurfaced his 2017 lawsuit, in which he and his wife, Gena O'Kelley, alleged that gadolinium-based contrast agents used in routine MRI scans caused lasting health problems for Gena.

The legal action, filed in San Francisco Superior Court against 11 medical and pharmaceutical companies, sought more than £8 million ($10 million) in damages.

The couple alleged that a chemical used in routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans—a gadolinium‑based contrast agent—had poisoned Gena and left her with lasting health problems. The Norrises sought more than $10 million in damages, arguing that manufacturers and distributors failed to warn about risks they claimed were associated with the chemical used to make MRI images clearer.

Chuck Norris 2017 Lawsuit

According to court documents reported by Forbes, Gena's health began to deteriorate after three contrast‑enhanced MRI scans over a period of days in 2013, when she was being checked for rheumatoid arthritis. After the injections, she developed a range of symptoms that the lawsuit described as debilitating.

These included intense burning sensations, pain throughout her body, episodes of weakness, cognitive difficulties, and what her legal team characterised as 'gadolinium deposition disease,' a condition they alleged was caused by gadolinium retained in her tissues.

Contrast agents like gadolinium are metals bound to other chemicals so they can safely highlight blood vessels and tissue abnormalities during an MRI. They are widely used and considered an important tool in modern diagnostics.

But the Norrises said that, in their case, the substance was toxic and that manufacturers should have provided clearer warnings. They also pointed to their nearly £1.6 million ($2 million) in out‑of‑pocket medical costs and treatments, including controversial therapies such as chelation, which Gena underwent in attempts to remove the metal from her body.

At the time, MRI contrast agents had already been used in millions of scans worldwide, and regulators such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acknowledged that gadolinium deposits can remain in organs like the brain and bones long after an MRI.

The FDA later required updated warnings on labels to disclose that retention, even though it maintained there was still no clear scientific evidence that these deposits cause long‑term health effects in people with normal kidney function.

Companies Respond to 2017 Lawsuit

The companies named in the lawsuit, including distributors like McKesson Corporation and manufacturers such as Bracco Imaging, responded by defending the safety of their products. Bracco declined to comment publicly on active litigation but stated that it 'takes patient safety very seriously' and stood behind the safety profile of its contrast agents. McKesson said it was reviewing the complaint and would respond appropriately.

Medical experts at the time emphasised that while small amounts of gadolinium can stay in the body after an MRI, the overwhelming majority of patients do not experience harmful effects. Contrast agents are still widely used because they often provide vital diagnostic information that outweighs these potential risks.

The FDA and European regulators have both reviewed evidence around gadolinium retention and adjusted safety communications accordingly, but major health authorities have not established a definitive link between retention and serious disease in most patients.

Dismissal Of The Lawsuit

After more than two years of legal proceedings and media attention, the Norris lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed in January 2020. Both sides agreed to drop claims without any settlement being paid, and each party shouldered its own legal costs.

The case was officially closed, leaving no judicial ruling on the scientific claims at its heart. Bracco said it was 'pleased' with the outcome and reiterated its commitment to safety.

Although the lawsuit did not result in a legal finding against any manufacturer, it helped bring attention to gadolinium retention and how best to communicate potential risks to patients.

At the time, advisory committees had already been considering updated warnings and risk minimisation steps for specific groups of patients, particularly those undergoing repeated scans or with compromised kidney function.

Read more