Facts
The non-marital son [Z.] (born xxxx 1990) filed a paternity and maintenance claim against his father [X.] (born 1947) with the District Court of Brig. In the course of these proceedings, [X.] acknowledged [Z.] as his son in May 2001. The District Court ordered the child's father by judgment of 11 December 2001 to pay monthly maintenance contributions to his son. [X.] complied with his maintenance obligation according to the judgment until his son reached the age of majority, but then discontinued the payments. On 23 September 2009, [Z.] filed a claim for adult maintenance with the District Court of Brig. The District Court ordered [X.] to pay his son a monthly maintenance contribution of CHF 750.-- from 1 October 2008 until the regular completion of his initial education. [X.] appealed this decision to the Cantonal Court of Valais. The Cantonal Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the District Court's decision on court costs.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court has dismissed [X.] 's appeal, insofar as it is admissible. The Cantonal Court rightly decided that it is reasonable for the appellant to provide adult maintenance to his son [Z.] . While it was acknowledged that the respondent's rejecting attitude is not praiseworthy, the Cantonal Court explained that this misconduct is to some extent understandable, as the respondent grew…