Re: Except plenty more.
Actually, if Norwegian had had its Max planes as per order book, they would've been less in a pickle finance wise than they are now. They had wanted to launch several routes based on the extended flight envelopes the Max aircraft offered, and were effectively forced to kill them. Along with that, the other claim in their lawsuit, the 787 engine problems, which also affected (and still affects) airlines like ANZ, Virgin Atlantic and BA, compounded the loss of fuel-efficient aircraft that their financial model was working with. Virgin had to bring back several of their A340-600s (which are more fuel efficient than the -300, but not nearly as efficient as the 787-8/9) from the desert, Norwegian had to lease some airframes in addition to paying the leases of grounded 787s.
So yes, I can see why Norwegian said "enough now. We want our money back", especially given Boeing and the FAA were very optimistic about a swift return to the air (hence Boeing continuing to manufacture Maxes until their runways, taxiways and employee parking lots were bursting at the seams). The additional aftereffect of Boeing's OTT optimism was that Spirit Aerosystems (a former Boeing unit in Wichita, Kansas), who build the fuselage, were asked to continue at full tilt until they were brought to a screeching halt instead of tapering off manufacture and delivery of the fuselages whilst there was insecurity about the time frame of the return. This has led to some severe cashflow problems and many job losses there. :-/
Biting the hand that feeds IT
