See alsoChin v. Merriot , 470 Mass. 527, 23 N.E.3d 929, 933-34 (2015) (interpreting the plain language of a codified section of Massachusetts's alimony reform act together with language in the act's uncodified sections, which explained the Legislature's intent that certain portions of the act should be applied prospectively).Xykis v. Arlington Bldg. Corp., No. A04-928, 2004 WL 2984372, at *2 (Minn. App. Dec. 28, 2004).We have previously looked to the text of the session laws as the primary evidence of the laws of Minnesota.