Tenure Reviews and the Appointments Process

I've often wondered about norms within academia about appropriate uses for tenure letters, particularly in appointments processes involving other schools.  I'm thinking particularly about two situations.

1. If Professor X writes a tenure letter in support of Candidate Y's application for tenure, and in the process of reviewing Candidate Y's work and writing the letter, realizes that Candidate Y might be a good fit for an open position at Professor X's school, is there anything unethical about Professor X encouraging her school to pursue Candidate Y as a possible lateral hire?  Is there any potential conflict here?

2. What if Professor X writes a tenure letter for Candidate Y for ABC Law School, and then the appointments chair at DEF Law School contacts Professor X and says that she understands that Professor X has written the letter for the ABC tenure process,  and would they mind forwarding a copy to DEF for their appointments process.  Is there any conflict there?  Should Professor X ask ABC School if they mind the letter being forwarded elsewhere?  That would potentially give away the fact that Candidate Y is on the lateral hiring market (which ABC law school may not know).

Can anyone identify clear norms that apply in either of these situations?

Comments

[Howard Wasserman]

No problem on #1; in fact, that is how a lot of lateral hiring happens. A different version is Prof. Z asks Prof. X to recommend a lateral for Prof. Z's school and suggests Prof. Y. This is partly why post-promotion and post-tenure are such good lateral times.

Number 2 is a problem because the tenure letter should be confidential among writer, candidate, and candidate's school. The letter writer should not share it, at least without permission. That does not stop Prof. X from sharing the gist of the letter with the interested lateraling school.

[Orin Kerr]

I agree with Howard.